RAJENDRA YADAV,JAUNPUR vs. ITO, JAUNPUR 1, NEW, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M.

(A) This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate order of learned CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi, dated 11.03.2025, for the AY 2018-19. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1) That the appellant has purchased a land property worth Rs. 2000000, but due to excessive circle rate, stamp duty paid on 3865000. 2) That the appellant has not paid any excessive amount of Rs. 2000000. 3) That the learned A.O. has added the 1865000 in disclosed income and taxed thereon, which is liable to be quashed. 4) That the learned A.O. has ignored the local market price, which can be verified through valuer, hence addition is liable to be deleted.

I.T.A. No. 177/Vns/2025 Assessment Year:2018-19 2

5) That the learned C.I.T. (Appeal) has not justified to reject the delay condonation application. 6) That the learned C.I.T. (Appeal) has ignored the condition of illness and rejected the application treated as general explanation.”

(B) The present appeal has been filed beyond the time prescribed under section 253(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The assessee has filed application for condonation of delay in filing of the present appeal. The learned Departmental Representative expressed no objection to condonation of delay, as requested by the appellant assessee. In view of the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing of the appeal is condoned under section 253(5) of the Act and the appeal is admitted. (C) In this case, assessment order dated 20.04.2021 was passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) whereby the assessee’s income was determined at Rs. 23,71,660/-. In the aforesaid assessment order, addition of Rs. 18,65,000/- was made. The assessee’s appeal against the assessment order was dismissed by the learned CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 11.03.2025. The assessee’s appeal was dismissed by learned CIT(A) on limitation ground, as the learned CIT(A) did not condone the delay in filing of appeal. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order of the learned CIT(A).

(D) At the time of hearing, learned Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that the delay in filing appeal in the office of learned CIT(A) should have been condoned as there was sufficient cause for the delay, within the meaning of section 249(3) of the Act. Therefore, he submitted, the learned CIT(A) should be directed to admit the appeal and to

I.T.A. No. 177/Vns/2025 Assessment Year:2018-19 3

decide the appeal on merits. The learned Departmental Representative expressed no objection to this.

(E) On perusal of impugned order of learned CIT(A), it is found that the appellant assessee had requested the learned CIT(A) to condone delay in filing of appeal on health ground. As there was sufficient cause for delay on the part of the assessee, in filing of appeal in the office of the learned CIT(A); the impugned order of learned CIT(A) is set-aside with the direction to condone he delay in filing of appeal and admit the appeal for passing denovo order, on merits of the grounds of appeal, in accordance with law, and after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

(F) All the grounds of appeal in present appeal are treated as disposed off in accordance with the aforesaid directions. For statistical purposes, the appeal is partly allowed.

(Order was pronounced in the open court on 09/06/2026)

Sd/- (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Accountant Member Date: 09/07/2026 SK, Sr.PS Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., 5. CIT(A) Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Lucknow