HIRA BALLABH KHULBE,KASHIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, FARIDABAD
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
- 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
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026