SHRI DEVINDER PARKASH VIJAY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-44(5), DELHI

The Assessee’s application for condonation of delay of 157 days in filing appeal and appeal are against order dated 27.09.2023 of Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax/National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred as “Ld. CIT(A)") under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“hereinafter referred as “the Act”) arising out of order dated 24.12.2019 passed by the ITO, Ward -44(5), Delhi (hereinafter referred as “Ld. AO") under Section 144 of the Act for assessment year 2017-18.

Brief facts of case are that as per the information available on record, assessee deposited Rs.36,89,500/- during demonetization period i.e. from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016. Another information received in office was that Rs.2,42,62,951/- including cash deposit during demonetization period. Information received in this office from the DIT I & CI, New Delhi dated 24.12.2018 showed that assessee sold property to Smt. Manju in cash. Assessee neither filed any online response with regard to source of cash deposited during demonetization nor filed any Income Tax Return under Section 139 of the Act. The case of assessee was identified as ‘non-filer’. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 03.02.2018. The assessee failed to file the Income Tax Return in compliance of notice under Section 142(1) of the Act. On completion of assessment proceeding, Ld. AO vide order dated 24.12.2019 made additions of Rs.2,24,62,951/- or Rs.90,00,000/-.

Against order dated 24.12.2019, appellant/assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A) which were dismissed vide order dated 27.09.2023.

Being aggrieved, appellant/assessee preferred application for condonation of delay of 157 days in filing appeal and appeal.

Learned Authorised Representative for the appellant/assessee submitted that due to financial and personal issues, there was a delay of 157 days in filing appeal. The assessee was running proprietary business of e-rikshaw and its parts. From May, 2017 onwards, business started incurring losses. Assessee failed to meet his loan commitment. Due to such condition, the property of the assessee was ceased. Assessee was not in India for few years. Therefore, the notices remained undelivered as premises of the assessee were ceased by the Bank and Financial Institutions. Appellant could not appear before the revenue authorities in assessment and appellate proceedings. Learned Authorised Representative for the appellant/assessee vehemently requested that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. AO.

Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue submitted that despite three notices appellant/assessee failed to remove deficiencies in Form 35.

From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contentions, it is crystal clear that there is a delay of 157 days in filing appeal. Appellant in Affidavit pleaded that he suffered losses in business. He failed to meet loan commitments and his premises were ceased by bank and financial institutions. Assessee could not file his return of income as he left country in search of job for his survival. Due to these reasons, he could not receive any notices from the Department. The explanation does not smack of any mala fide. Therefore, delay of 157 days in filing appeal is condoned. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) had dismissed the appeal as appellant failed to remove discrepancies in Form 35. Appellant has requested that the matter be restored to the file of Ld. AO.

In view of above material facts, in the interest of justice, it is considered expedient to set aside the orders dated 27.09.2023 of Ld. CIT(A) and 24.12.2019 of Ld. AO and restore the matter to the file of Ld. AO for fresh decision in accordance with law after affording fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing to assessee.

In the result, the application for condonation of delay of 157 days in filing appeal and appeal of appellant/assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.