ATUL AGARWAL,NEW DEVPURI BHATIPURA MEERUT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3785/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 August 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON'BLE (Vice President)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to a reasonable cause. The issues in dispute were remitted back to the Ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh after giving the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the NFAC. The appeal was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) due to non-prosecution. There was a delay of 191 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, attributed to the death of the assessee's counsel.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal was a reasonable cause for condonation. Whether the appeal should be decided afresh by the CIT(A) after giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’’ : NEW DELHI

For Respondent: Shri Sangeet Bansal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 05.08.2025Pronounced: 05.08.2025

Asstt. Year : 2020-21 Atul Agarwal, VS. ITO, Ward-1(1), Meerut 474, Dev Puri, Bhatipura, Meerut-250002, Uttar Pradesh (PAN: AEWPA0627H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Sangeet Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 05.08.2025 ORDER This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 26.09.2024 passed by the NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee, hence, I am proceeding exparte qua the assessee, after hearing the ld. DR and perusing the records.

3.

At the outset, it noted that there is a delay of 191 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and the delay was occurred due to death of the assessee’s counsel. In view of above, I am of the view that there is a reasonable cause for delay in filing the appeal, hence, the delay in dispute is condoned.

4.

I have heard the Ld. DR and perused the records. It is noted that in this case Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non-prosecution. Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below. In view of the factual matrix and in the interest of justice, I remit back the issues in dispute to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to fully cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) during the proceedings.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →