RUPESH AGGARWAL,GHAZIABAD V. ITO WARD 2(2)(2), GHAZIABAD

ITA 3145/DEL/2025

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 793110 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DAYAINDER SINGH SIDHU
• Assessee Lawyers: ANKIT KUMAR
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA No.3145/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Sh. Rupesh Aggarwal, 107, Model Town West, H.O. Ghaziabad, Ghaziabad-201001 Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(2), Ghaziabad (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ALZPA7694L Assessee by : Sh. Ankit Kumar, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 22.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1073772929(1) dated 27.02.2025, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. Delay of 13 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in the larger interest of justice in light of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 4. 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 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3145/Del/2025 Rupesh Aggarwal 2 appellate proceedings and therefore, in the larger interest of justice met in case, the matter be restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC. 5. 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. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 22/09/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (S. Rifaur Rahman) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 22/09/2025 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Printed from counselvise.com "