ASHA NAGPAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 59(1), NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not properly examine the service of the notice under section 143(2) from the assessment records. The case was set aside to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication, including consideration of additional evidence.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed an order from the CIT(A). The primary issues raised were the validity of the notice under section 143(2) and the non-acceptance of additional evidence by the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
Whether the notice under section 143(2) was validly served and whether additional evidence should be admitted and considered by the appellate authority.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. C. M. GargDr. B. R. R. Kumar
ORDER
Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-23, New Delhi dated 06.12.2019.
The assessee has taken the main issue of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act and also non-accepting the additional evidences filed before the ld. CIT(A). From the paragraph 6.2, we find that the ld. CIT(A) has not examined the Assessment Order regarding issue and service of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act from the records except relying on the first paragraph of the Assessment Order. Hence, we hereby set aside the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to factually examine the issue of service of notice u/s 143(2) from the assessment records and also to consider the additional evidences filed by the assessee in Asha Nagpal relation to provisions of Rule 46A and adjudicate the issue de novo.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 11/08/2023.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026