Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 arose against an order in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee claimed inability to appear due to communication gaps during virtual hearings.
Held
The Tribunal noted the possibility of communication gaps during virtual hearings and lack of effective compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act in the lower appellate order. It deemed it appropriate to set aside the appeal for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the lower appellate authority properly adjudicated the appeal considering communication gaps and compliance with procedural requirements during virtual hearings.
Sections Cited
144, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal
Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Hemraj, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/o M. K. Bhatt & Co., CAs Ward-5(1)(3), G-7, Preet Vihar, Noida, New Delhi-110092 Uttar Pradesh-201301 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. BARPH2320G Assessee by : Sh. Malav Goswami, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 09.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 09.09.2025 ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the Addl./JCIT(A), Bhopal’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1072729131(1) dated 30.01.2025, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
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
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) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.