KHAN CHAND KUKREJA,BHOPAL vs. ASESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, BHOPAL

आदेश/ O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Feeling aggrieved by the order of first-appeal dated 21.10.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of the assessment-order dated 13.03.2023 passed by learned Assessment Unit of Income-tax Department [“Ld. AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2018-19, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).

days and therefore time-barred. The assessee has filed an application/

affidavit for condonation of delay; the same is scanned and re-produced for

an immediate reference:

explanatory and which do not require repetition, were discussed and the Ld.

DR for revenue does not have any objection if the bench condones delay and

accordingly left it to the wisdom of bench. We have considered the

explanation advanced by assessee and in absence of any contrary fact or

material on record, the assessee is found to have a “sufficient cause” for

delay in filing present appeal. We find that section 253(5) of the Act

empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if

there is a “sufficient cause” for not presenting appeal within prescribed time.

It is also a settled position by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land

Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387

that whenever substantial justice and technical considerations are opposed

to each other, the cause of substantial justice must be preferred by adopting

a justice-oriented approach. Thus, taking into account the facts of case, the

provision of section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we

take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with

hearing.

assessee-individual filed return of AY 2018-19 u/s 139 declaring a total

income of Rs. 2,24,670/- which was assessed. Subsequently, on the basis of

information available with Ld. AO revealing that the assessee had deposited

cash of Rs. 10,10,200/- in his a/c with Jharneshwar Nagrik Sahakari Bank,

the AO issued notice dated 31.03.2022 to make assessment u/s 147. In response, the assessee filed return repeating the total income of Rs.

2,24,670/-. Ultimately, the Ld. AO completed assessment u/s 147 after

making an addition of Rs. 10,10,200/- on account of unexplained deposit

and thereby re-assessing total income at Rs. 12,34,780/-. Aggrieved, the

assessee carried matter in first-appeal but the Ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte

order due to non-prosecution by assessee whereby Ld. CIT(A) upheld AO’s

order. Still aggrieved, the assessee has come in next appeal before us.

order dismissing assessee’s first appeal and merely approving the order of

AO, although due to non-prosecution by assessee. However, the non-

prosecution by assessee was not deliberate or intentional, it happened due

to the circumstance as stated in Para 4 & 5 of affidavit (re-produced above).

However, the assessee is having, in his possession, all relevant details and

documents and ready to make an effective representation before Ld. CIT(A).

He prayed that in the interest of justice, one more opportunity be given to

assessee by way of restoring this matter at the level of Ld. CIT(A) for a de

novo adjudication. He acknowledged that the assessee shall definitely make

a proper and effective representation before Ld. CIT(A).

assessee for restoration, submitted that the assessee must be given

appropriate directions to ensure strict compliance before Ld. CIT(A).

of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be

caused to revenue if the present matter is restored at the level of Ld. CIT(A),

we remand this matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh,

at the risk and responsibility of assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) shall give necessary

opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order

uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain

vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by Ld.

CIT(A) without seeking unnecessary adjournments failing which the Ld.

CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. Ordered

accordingly.

Order pronounced in open court on 24/04/2026

Sd/- Sd/-

(PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Indore

िदनांक/Dated : 24/04/2026

Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYAssistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore