JUG VIR SINGH,BULANDSHAHR vs. ITO, WARD -3(1), BULANDSHAHR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 395 days in filing the appeal, citing the assessee's lack of knowledge of tax laws, use of e-mail, death of his wife, and depression. The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and AO and restored the matter to the AO for a fresh decision.
What were the facts?
The assessee had cash deposits of Rs. 64,78,000/- in AY 2011-12. Despite notices, the assessee did not provide explanations or evidence. The AO determined the income based on the AIR information. The appeal against the AO's order was dismissed by the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned due to the assessee's personal circumstances and lack of knowledge, and whether the matter should be restored to the AO for a fresh decision.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 250,Section 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR
O R D E R
PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The application for condonation of delay of 395 days in filing appeal and appeal of assessee are against order dated 08.12.2023 of Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax/National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( hereinafter referred as “the Act”) arising out of order dated 21.12.2018 of Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(1), Bulandshahr (hereinafter referred as “Ld. AO") under Section 144/147 of the Act for assessment year 2011-12.
Brief facts of case are that as per AIR information received, assessee had cash deposits of Rs.64,78,000/- in the assessment year 2011-12. The assessee was asked to explain the source of cash deposits with documentary evidence. The assessee did not furnish any reply. After recording reasons under Section 147 of the Act with prior approval of Ld. PCIT, Ghaziabad, notice under Section 148 dated 26.03.2018 was issued to assessee. The assessee did not make any compliance. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 15.10.2018 was issued but no compliance was made by the assessee. Final opportunity was provided to the assessee by issuing notice under Section 30.11.2018. Ld. AO vide order dated 21.12.2018 determined the income of assessee as Rs.64,78,000/-.
Against the order dated 21.12.2018, appellant/assessee preferred appeal which was dismissed vide order dated 08.12.2023.
Being aggrieved, appellant/assessee preferred application for condonation of delay of 395 days in filing appeal and present appeal.
Learned Authorised Representative for the appellant/assessee submitted that appellant/assessee is not versed with Income Tax Laws and not accustomed to use of e-mail. Smt. Nirmala W/o assessee expired on 04.11.2022. Assessee went into depression. So there is a delay of 395 days in filing appeal. Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without deciding the merits of the case. The matter may be restored to the file of Ld. AO.
Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue had no objection.
From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contentions, it is crystal clear that there is delay of 395 days in filing appeal due to lack of knowledge of Income Tax Laws and use of e-mail, death of wife of assessee and illness of assessed. The explanation does not smack of mala fide as appellant had not gained anything by filing not filing appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, delay of 395 days in filing appeal is condoned. Ld. CIT(A) in order dated 08.12.2023 has observed that despite several opportunity of hearing, the assessee failed to comply with the notice and dismiss the appeal. Appellant has requested for restoring the matter 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 08.12.2023 of Ld. CIT(A) and 21.12.2018 of Ld. Assessing Officer and restore the matter to the file of Ld. AO for fresh decision in accordance with law after affording fair opportunity of hearing to assessee.
In the result, the application for condonation of delay of 395 days in filing appeal and appeal of appellant/assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 25th June, 2025.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026