An in-depth review of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal’s handling of the appeal filed by Jitender Kumar against the decision of the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Panipat, for the assessment year 2009-10. This article explores the nuances of the tribunal’s decision delivered on July 12, 2022.
The appeal was filed against the order dated October 31, 2018, by the CIT(A)-Karnal, which was dismissed for lack of prosecution by the assessee. The tribunal scrutinized the conduct of the assessee and the procedural aspects leading to the initial dismissal.
This segment details the procedural journey of the appeal through the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, emphasizing the opportunities given to the assessee and the eventual dismissal due to non-cooperation. The legal principles of ‘vigilantibus, non dormientibus, jura subveniunt’ (law assists those who are vigilant, not those who sleep over their rights) are discussed in the context of this case.
The final decision to remand the case back to the CIT(A) underscores the tribunal’s intent to ensure justice while emphasizing the need for the assessee’s cooperation in the appellate proceedings. This section discusses the potential impact of this decision on future tribunal procedures and the behavior expected of litigants.
The tribunal’s decision in Jitender Kumar vs. ITO highlights critical aspects of procedural justice in tax litigation, emphasizing the importance of cooperation and active participation by the appellants. This case serves as a precedent for how procedural lapses can affect the outcome of appeals and the balance between judicial leniency and strict adherence to procedural norms.
Tribunal Review: Jitender Kumar vs ITO, Ward-2 Panipat, ITA No. 748/DEL/2020
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform