HIRA BALLABH KHULBE,KASHIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3272/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 August 20265 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 condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) finding sufficient cause. Considering the small demand and the assessee's old age, the Tribunal decided to finalize the appeal on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment was reopened based on AIR information regarding a cash deposit. Notices were sent to an old address, and the assessee, unaware of the proceedings due to shifting and health issues, did not respond. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine due to a delay of 2073 days.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was to be condoned, and whether the addition made by the AO was sustainable on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 147,Section 144,Section 250,Section 249(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI

Before: MS MADHUMITA ROY

For Appellant: Adv (Through VC)
For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 03/06/2026Pronounced: 04/08/2026

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3272/Del/2026 (A.Y 2012-13) Hira Ballabh Khulbe Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/309, Ganpati Ward-1(3), Faridabad, Apartments, Aliganj road, Haryana Kashipur, Uttar Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AHGPK8445E

Assessee by : Sh. Pavan Kumar Nath, Adv (Through VC) Revenue by: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 03/06/2026 Date of pronouncement 04/08/2026 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM.: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against

the order dated 23.02.2026 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of

Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

[hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC] under Section

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the

Act’) arising out of the Assessment Order dated 07.12.2019

passed by the Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department

(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Ld. AO’) under Section 144/147 of

the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) for Assessment Year 2012-

13.

2 ITA No. 3272/Del/2026 Hira Ballbh Khulbe On the basis of AIR information in regard to cash deposit 2.

of Rs. 11,00,000/- in the joint account of the assessee with his

wife, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued for

reopening of the assessment and was sent at the old address of

the assessee at Faridabad. The notice under Section148 as well

as subsequent statutory notices issues under

Sectionw143(2)/142(1) of the Act, were sent at the Faridabad

address remained not responded. Thereafter vide assessment

order dated 07.12.2019 under Section147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act

the AO completed the assessment by assessing the assessee’s

income at Rs. 11,00,000/- raising a tax demand of Rs.

5,06,590/-. The assessee’s stand is that he had shifted from

Faridabad in December 2010 to the current address and

thereafter, no member of his family was residing at Faridabad

address. No notice was ever received by the assessee and he

was unaware of the proceedings and therefore, the assessee

could neither file return nor could furnish any explanation. The

assessee is a senior citizen and suffering from age related

health issues and came to know the impugned demand only in

A.Y. 2023-24 through Chartered Accountant. Thereupon, the

assessee filed appeal before NFAC on 09.09.2025. An

3 ITA No. 3272/Del/2026 Hira Ballbh Khulbe application under Section249(3) for condonation of delay of

2073 days in filing appeal before the NFAC, duly supported by

affidavit explaining the delay, was filed along with the appeal.

However, the learned CIT(A) vide impugned order dated

23.02.2026 dismissed the assessee’s appeal in limine on the

ground of limitation, without going into the merits. Aggrieved by

the same, the assessee is in appeal before us.

3.

Considering the contention made in the condonation

application, the averments whereof duly supported by the

affidavit of the assessee it is held that the assessee was

prevented by sufficient cause in filing the appeal before the

First Appellate Authority. The delay of 2073 days in filing the

appeal before the First Appellate Authority is, therefore,

condoned.

4.

Having regard to the small demand, the appeal is decided

to be finalized hence particularly taking into consideration the

old age of the assessee. Heard the Ld. representatives of the

respective parties and perused the materials available on

record. The stand of the assessee from the very beginning is

that deposit of Rs.11,00,000/- in the joint account lying with

his wife wherein Rs.8,00,000/- was out of sale proceeds of

4 ITA No. 3272/Del/2026 Hira Ballbh Khulbe residential property and Rs, 3,00,000/- was from past savings.

The above statement was supported by the affidavit of the

assessee and other relevant documents.

5.

Thus, considering the facts and circumstances of the

instant case the impugned addition made by the AO is not

found not sustainable and is liable to be deleted. Ordered

accordingly.

6.

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 04/08/2026.

Sd/- (MADHUMITA ROY) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 04/08/2026 R. Naheed, Sr PS Copy forwarded to

1.

Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi

5 ITA No. 3272/Del/2026 Hira Ballbh Khulbe

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →