SHRI AMRIK SINGH ,MANSA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 1 (4) , MANSA

MA 2/ASR/2024

AI Insights

The case revolves around a Miscellaneous Application filed by Amrik Singh, the appellant, concerning an alleged oversight in the appellate order regarding the provision of a personal hearing via video conference under the Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021. The original appeal, which was decided on 21st August 2023, involved a claim for exemption under section 10AA(1) of the Income Tax Act related to leave encashment. The Tribunal had previously upheld the order of the CIT(A), rejecting the appeal on its merits after thorough discussions and hearings. The Tribunal found that the issue raised in the Miscellaneous Application was out of context as the appellant had been fully represented and heard in all stages of the appeal process.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711307 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M. A. No. 2/Asr/2024 (Arising out in ITA No. 198/Asr/2023) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Amrik Singh S/o Lal Singh, Mansa [PAN: ABNPS 9727Q] (Appellant) Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Mansa (Respondent) Appellant by Respondent by : : Sh. J. K. Gupta, Adv. Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement : : 23.05.2025 21.07.2025 ORDER Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This Miscellaneous Application is filed by the assessee u/s 254(2) dated 29.12.2023 in relation to the order of the Tribunal passed on 21.08.2023 and the said application is within time. Printed from counselvise.com 2 M. A. No. 2/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 2. In course of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that ground no. 6 of this appeal as contained in the memorandum of appeal in Form No. 36 has not been decided by the Hon’ble Bench in the appellate order passed on 21st August, 2023. For the sake of convenience, we reproduce the ground no. 6 as appearing in Form No. 36 is as under: “6. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) should have given the personal hearing via video conference so as to make oral submissions in the interest of justice and law as per new the provisions of Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021 notified on 28.12.2021.” 3. We find that the Tribunal has decided the appeal on merits of the case and after hearing the counsel of the assessee (Mr. J.K. Gupta, Advocate) and also the ld. DR, has rejected the appeal of the assessee after elaborate discussion. The legal issue in this case was in relation to claim of exemption u/s 10AA(1) of the Act relating to leave encashment, where the Tribunal has upheld the order of the ld. CIT(A) on merits of the case after hearing both the parties at length. We also find that in course of appellate proceedings before the first appellate authority, the ld. CIT(A) has taken into consideration, the submissions of the appellant and thereafter has decided the issue on merits of the case vide a detailed order. 4. At the next appellate stage before the Tribunal the same issue was heard physically and after hearing the assessee at length has decided the appeal on merits, upholding the order of the ld. CIT(A). Printed from counselvise.com 3 M. A. No. 2/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 5. Under such circumstances, this miscellaneous application filed by the assessee which intends to claim that there was absence of hearing through video conference, before the ld. CIT(A), is totally out of context. It is not a case that the assessee has not been allowed the chance to represent the matter. On the contrary, we find that the assessee has been fully represented through his ld. AR and there is no violation of the principles of natural justice. 6. As such, we are of the opinion that this particular issue or the ground no. 6 contained in the memorandum of appeal in Form No. 36, is totally out of context and has no factual or legal sanction because the facts on record has been thoroughly analyzed by the ld. CIT(A) as well as by the Tribunal in presence of the assessee and his ld. AR. 7. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is rejected being devoid of merits. Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 as on 21.07.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Brajesh Kumar Singh) (Udayan Dasgupta) Accountant Member Judicial Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant: Printed from counselvise.com 4 M. A. No. 2/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T True Copy By Order Printed from counselvise.com "