JAYESH PATEL,INDORE vs. ITO WARD-1(1), INDORE

आदेश/ O R D E R

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

Feeling aggrieved by the order of first-appeal dated 22.08.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of the assessment-order dated 07.09.2021 passed by learned National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [“Ld. AO”] u/s 147 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment- Year [“AY”] 2017-18, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).

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 his return of AY 2017-18 declaring a total income

of Rs. 2,06,440/- which was assessed. Subsequently, on the basis of

information in his possession revealing that there was a cash deposit of Rs.

15,00,000/- in Kotak Mahindra Bank a/c of Neil Patel (assessee’s minor son)

operated by assessee, during demonetization period, the AO issued notice dated 26.09.2019 u/s 148 to assessee to make assessment u/s 147. During

proceedings, the AO issued notices u/s 142(1) in response to which the

assessee filed submissions. Ultimately, the AO completed assessment after

making an addition of Rs. 23,00,000/- [Rs. 8,00,000 + Rs. 15,00,000] u/s

69A r.s.w. 115BBE on account of unexplained deposits and thereby re-

assessing total income at Rs. 25,06,440/-. Aggrieved, the assessee carried

matter in first-appeal but could not make participation. Therefore, the Ld.

CIT(A) passed ex-parte order approving the action of AO and dismissing

assessee’s appeal.

CIT(A) did not send any notice of hearing through physical mode, therefore

the assessee could not be aware of the hearings which only has led to non-

participation. Hence, there is a bonafide reason of non-participation before

Ld. CIT(A). He, however, asserted in open court that 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).

restoration, submitted that the assessee had remained non-compliant

during the proceedings of first-appeal, which constrained the Ld. CIT(A) to pass ex-parte order. It was, therefore, submitted that while restoring the

matter, appropriate directions may be issued to ensure strict compliance by

the assessee.

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 restore this matter 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 27/04/2026

Sd/- Sd/-

(PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore िदनांक/Dated : 27/04/2026 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