MAM RAJ SINGH,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD-1(4), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2165/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2022AY 2009-102 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was overly technical in dismissing the appeal for delay, especially for an individual not previously filing returns. The assessee's claim of unawareness of the assessment order, despite due diligence, should not be disregarded.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual, did not file a return of income but was assessed under Section 69A for unexplained cash deposits. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay of 11 months.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay, without considering the assessee's explanation for the delay and the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: DR. B.R.R.KUMAR & SH.ANUBHAV SHARMAShri MAM RAJ SINGH,

For Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. DR
Hearing: 05.05.2022Pronounced: 05.05.2022

The appeal has been preferred by the assessee against order dated 31.12.2018 in appeal no. 389/57 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ghaziabad in appeal pending before it against order dated 16.11.2016 in assessment u/s 147/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 passed by ITO, W-1(4), Ghaziabad.

2.

Heard and perused the record. The impugned order dated 31.12.2018 shows that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal treating it non-est and defective as it was filed with the delay of 11 months.

3.

The assessee is an individual who had not filed any return of income but based upon deposit of cash amounting to Rs. 82,17,500/- in the Savings Bank Account during the financial year 2008-09 relevant to assessment year 2009-10 was assessed to tax by invoking Section 69A of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has been over technical in expecting explanation of reasons for delay to precision in filing appeal. Where assessee is an individual and not filing any tax returns previously, his claim of not being aware of the assessment order inspite of due diligence should not be washed away on the basis that assessee failed to prove that certified copies of the order have been taken for non-receipt of order.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →