Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 arises against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee could not appear to plead and prove facts due to communication gaps.
Held
The Tribunal held that due to communication gaps and non-compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act, the order was inappropriate. The appeal was set aside and restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was adequately given an opportunity to present their case before the lower appellate authority, considering communication gaps and virtual hearing mechanism.
Sections Cited
153C, 143(3), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Naveen Chandra
Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Sh. Joginder Payla, Vs DCIT, H. No. 453, Sector-17, Faridabad, Central Circle-27, Haryana-121002 New Delhi-110055 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ANXPP9610M Assessee by : Sh. Sharad Agrawal, AR Revenue by : Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 27.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 27.08.2025 ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A), Delhi-31’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1073208616(1) dated 12.02.2025, in proceedings u/s 153C r.w.s. 143(3) 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.