GAURAV JAIN,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 46(1), DELHI, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4897/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 September 2025Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps in virtual hearings and noted non-compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act in the lower appellate order. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2018-19 arose against an order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The assessee contended that due to communication gaps during virtual hearings, they could not present all relevant facts effectively.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented from effectively presenting their case due to communication gaps during virtual hearings, warranting a fresh adjudication by the lower appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: CA &
Hearing: 22.09.2025Pronounced: 22.09.2025

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1075697712(1) dated 21.04.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings and therefore, in the larger interest of justice met in case, the matter be restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC.

1.

Gaurav Jain 4. Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance of the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism could not be altogether ruled out. This is indeed coupled with the facts that there is also no effective compliance to section 250(6) of the Act in the impugned lower appellate order stipulating points of determination to be framed followed by a detailed adjudication thereupon. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to set aside the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →