MANISH KUMAR GUPTA,REWARI vs. ITO WARD-1, NARNAUL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1813/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 June 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the NFAC's orders were not sustainable due to the failure to consider the assessee's adjournment requests and the summary dismissal on merits. The assessee was granted an opportunity to contest the issues on merits and law.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were filed with a delay of 52 days, which was condoned. The assessee had failed to appear before the NFAC for earlier proceedings, and their appeals were dismissed for delayed filing and summarily on merits. The NFAC's orders were found to be unsustainable.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC's dismissal of appeals for delayed filing and on merits, without considering adjournment requests, is sustainable. Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to be heard on merits and law.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CA
For Respondent: Shri Narpar Singh, Sr. DR
Hearing: 24.06.2025Pronounced: 24.06.2025

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITAs No.1813/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & ITAs No.1811 & 1812/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Manish Kumar Gupta, Vs ITO, C/o Anu Jain & Company, Ward-1, 272-R, First Floor, Narnaul. Near Palika Complex, Model Town, Rewari – 123 401, Haryana. PAN: AQSPG4471H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sanjeev Jain, CA Revenue by : Shri Narpar Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24.06.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

The appeals are preferred by the assessee against the orders dated 18.11.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi in regard to two AYs involved.

2.

At the time of hearing, it came up that the appeal ITA 1813 and 1812 has been filed before this Tribunal with a delay of 52 days and an application for condonation is filed. In the light of the fact that the delay is not of exceptional period, the same is condoned and the appeals are admitted for hearing.

3.

On hearing both the sides, we find that before the NFAC the assessee has failed to appear. Although the ld. DR defended the order of the NFAC submitting that sufficient notices were issued, however, we find that the assessee’s request in all the appeals for adjournment have not been considered without any reasoned finding. Then we find that in assessee’s appeal for AY 2011-12 are also dismissed for delayed filing of appeal. Also summarily on merits. The orders are not sustainable under law. Accordingly, it is an appropriate case to give the assessee an opportunity to contest on merits and law, after explaining the reasons for delay in filing appeals before NFAC. The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. The issues in appeal in and the those in of AY 2011-12, arising out of the penalty order are remitted to the files of the NFAC to give the opportunity of being hearing to the assessee and decide the application for condonation of delay afresh and then proceed to decide in accordance with the law. In ITA 1813, the issue on merits as well as law, are restored to the files of the NFAC to give a fresh opportunity of being heard and decide in accordance with the law.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →