MANOJ KUMAR,GHAZIABAD V. INCOME TAX OFFICER , DELHI

ITA 6386/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sh. Manoj Kumar against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Coimbatore, concerning the assessment year 2012-13. The appeal was initially delayed by 131 days but was condoned based on the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others. The primary issue arose from the assessee's inability to appear and present relevant facts during the lower appellate proceedings, attributed to communication gaps in the newly introduced virtual hearing system. The Revenue supported the lower authority's decision on merits, but the Tribunal found it just to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 788290 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6386/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sh. Manoj Kumar, Block 1/141, Govindpuram, Ghaziabad -201013 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-67(7), Delhi PAN: AZYPK0161D (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)- 1, Coimbatore’s DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1075107822(1), dated 27.03.2025 involving proceedings under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 2. For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 131 days in filing of the instant appeal is Assessee by None Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 25.11.2025 Date of pronouncement 25.11.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.6386/Del/2025 2 | P a g e condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 3. It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing 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, the matter may be restored back to the Assessing Officer. The Revenue vehemently supports the learned lower authority’s action making the addition(s) herein on merits. 3. 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. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the Assessing Officer for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.6386/Del/2025 3 | P a g e 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 25th November, 2025 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 25th November, 2025. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "