DINESH KUMAR PANWAR,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8448/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 August 2026AY 2017-20184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the significant delay in filing the appeal due to family death and lack of awareness. The CIT(A)'s ex parte order was set aside to ensure natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited a significant sum during demonetization but failed to file returns or respond to notices. The Assessing Officer made additions, and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the ex parte order of the CIT(A) violated principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

For Respondent: Shri Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 23.06.2026Pronounced: 12.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”, NEW DELHI SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND BEFORE SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 8448/Del/2025, A.Y. 2017-18 Dinesh Kumar Panwar Vs. Income Tax Officer, A-540 Madipur Colony, Ward 44(6) New Delhi Civic Centre Minto Road, New Delhi �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AHQPP5874L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Anil Kumar, CA Respondent by : Shri Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 23.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 12.08.2026

O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: The application for condonation of delay of 1 year and 301 days in filing appeal and the appeal filed by the assessee is against the order dated 02.01.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) arising out of assessment order dated

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 8448/Del/2025 Dinesh Kumar Panwar, Delhi

26.12.2019 of Ld. Assessing Officer/ITO, Ward 44(6), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘The AO’) u/s 144 of the Act for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that as per information, the assessee deposited Rs. 88,26,000/- during the demonetization period in his bank account. The assessee failed to file any online response and failed to file copy of ITR u/s 139 of the Act. The case was treated as non-filer. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee. The assessee failed to furnish reply. The proceedings u/s 144(1) of the Act were initiated. On completion of proceedings, Ld. AO vide order dated 26.12.2019 made addition of Rs. 1,16,52,475/- and Rs. 44,610/-. 3. Against order dated 26.12.2019 of Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A) which was dismissed vide order dated 02.01.2024. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant/assessee filed application for condonation of delay of 1 year and 301 days in filing appeal and appeal. 5. Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that delay of 1 year and 301 days in filing appeal occurred due to death in family and non- awareness of the impugned order. The application is supported by affidavit. The explanation does not smack of malafides, as appellant has not gained anything by not filing appeal earlier. Therefore, the delay of 1 year and 301 days in filing appeal is condoned.

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 8448/Del/2025 Dinesh Kumar Panwar, Delhi

6.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) vide ex parte order dismissed the appeal in violation of principle of natural justice. The matter may be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A). 7. Ld. Departmental Representative relied on impugned order. 8. From examination of the record in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) vide ex parte order dated 02.01.2024 dismissed the appeal for non-participation in appeal proceedings by the assessee and non-filing of documents in support of grounds of appeal. 9. In view of above material facts and in interest of justice, the impugned order dated 02.01.2024 of ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for afresh decision in accordance with law after affording fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 10. The application for condonation of delay is allowed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 12.08.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (RAMIT KOCHAR) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 12.08.2026 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to:

P a g e | 4 ITA No. 8448/Del/2025 Dinesh Kumar Panwar, Delhi

1.

Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 139

All 3,629 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →