SANJAY RAGHUVANSHI,NOIDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3)(3), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7683/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 April 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to circumstances beyond the assessee's control. However, since the assessee did not appear and had failed to provide explanations for cash deposits during assessment and appellate proceedings, the matter was remitted back to the AO for de novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a significant delay of 178 days. The delay was attributed to the previous counsel's failure to file submissions before the CIT(A), leading to an ex-parte order of which the assessee was unaware until penalty proceedings were initiated. The Tribunal condoned the delay, citing reasonable cause and the interest of justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned. Whether the matter should be remitted to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment due to the assessee's failure to provide explanations for cash deposits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr.DR
Hearing: 20.04.2026Pronounced: 20.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.7683/Del/2025 [Assessment Year : 2017-18] Sanjay Raghuvanshi vs ITO, 108, Pocket-6, Sector-82, Ward-5(3)(3) Kendriya Vihar, Aaykar Bhawan, A-2D, Noida-201301 Sector-24, Noida PAN-AHLPR5975M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by None Respondent by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 20.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement 20.04.2026

ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The present appeal is filed by assessee against the order dated 21.03.2025 of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”] in Appeal No. CIT (A) Noida-1/11357/2019-20 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising out of assessment order dated 31.12.2019 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

It is observed that the appeal was filed delayed by 178 days. Before us, an application for condonation of delay was filed duly supported by the affidavit of the assessee. In the said petition, it is stated that the assessee has appointed a Chartered Accountant to

ITA No.7683/Del/2025

represent his case but unfortunately the counsel has not filed any submissions before the CIT(A) and therefore, the appeal was decided ex-parte. Since the assessee was not aware of any such order passed by ld. CIT(A) which fact was come to his knowledge only when a notice of pending penalty proceedings was received by the assessee. Thereafter assessee immediately contacted to another counsel and filed the appeal. Due to these circumstances, significant delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal was occurred which is neither intentional nor deliberate and due to the circumstances beyond the control of the assessee, therefore, it is requested to condone the delay.

3.

Per contra, Ld. Sr. DR vehemently opposed to the request of the assessee for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

4.

Having considered the arguments of both the parties. We find that there is reasonable and sufficient cause with the assessee in filing the appeal delayed by 178 days. It must be remembered that in every case of delay, there can be some lapses on the part of the litigant concerned however, that alone is not enough to turn down the plea of assessee and to shut the doors against him. When the explanation does not smack of mala fide or it is not put forth as a part of dilatory strategy, the Courts must give utmost consideration to such litigant and its right of hearing of appeal on merit ought not to be rejected. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and in the larger interest of justice, delay in filling the appeal is hereby, condoned and appeal of the assessee is taken for adjudication on merits. Page | 2

ITA No.7683/Del/2025

5.

At the time of hearing, no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, the appeal is being adjudicated on the basis of material available on record and in the absence of the assessee.

6.

Heard the contention of ld. Sr. DR and perused the material available on records. On perusal of the assessment order, it is observed that the assessee has failed to file any submission to explain the nature and source of cash deposited in the bank accounts during the entire year. Even during appellate proceedings, assessee has not filed any submission despite of repeated opportunities. Under these circumstances, as a principle of the natural justice, one more opportunity is given to the assessee and the matter is remitted back to the file of the AO with direction to pass the assessment order denovo afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to participate in set aside proceedings before the AO. With these directions, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20.04.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANISH AGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Date:- 22.04.2026 *Amit Kumar, Sr. P.S* Page | 3

ITA No.7683/Del/2025

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →