MANISH ARORA,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8291/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 September 2026AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the NFAC had dismissed the assessee's appeal solely on the ground of delay, without condoning it, and that the assessee had indeed shown sufficient cause for the delay before the NFAC. The Tribunal was satisfied with the explanation provided by the assessee regarding the delay. Consequently, the Tribunal condoned the delay in preferring the appeal before the NFAC. Given that the NFAC dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay and the AO had passed an ex-parte assessment order, the Tribunal, considering the totality of facts and in the interest of justice, decided to restore the issue to the file of the AO. The AO was directed to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claims and decide the issue afresh based on facts and law. The assessee was also directed to appear before the AO and cooperate with the proceedings. The grounds raised by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Manish Arora, an individual, is in appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 17-10-2025. This order arose from an assessment order dated 10-03-2023 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2018-19. The department had information that the assessee engaged in property transactions totaling Rs. 2,95,10,000, received rental income of Rs. 3,10,000, professional fees of Rs. 62,000, and sent foreign remittances of Rs. 87,50,000. The assessee did not file a return of income for the year. During reassessment and section 148A(d) proceedings, the assessee provided no explanation. The AO completed the assessment ex-parte, determining total income at Rs. 1,77,70,400. The assessee's appeal to the NFAC was dismissed without condoning the delay.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeal without condoning the delay, thereby not adjudicating the appeal on merits, as per the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contentions: The learned Authorized Representative (AR) for the assessee argued that the NFAC dismissed the appeal without considering the merits of the case. He contended that the assessee had shown sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the NFAC, stating that the assessee is a Non-Resident Indian (NRI) residing abroad and had not received communications during the assessment proceedings. Revenue's Contentions: The learned Senior Departmental Representative (DR) for the Revenue submitted that the assessee had not shown sufficient cause for the delay, and therefore, the appeal was rightly dismissed by the NFAC.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 148A(d),Section 142(1),Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”, DELHI

Before: SH. SUDHIR KUMAR & SH. MANISH AGARWAL

For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 24/08/2026Pronounced: 24/08/2026

ITA No.8291/Del2025 Manish Arora vs. ITO A.Y.2018-19 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, DELHI

BEFORE SH. SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.8291/DEL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Manish Kumar Arora Vs. ITO Ward 59(3) A-121 Preet Vihar Delhi Delhi-110092 PAN No. AMFPA 0630B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)

Appellant by Sh. A. Madhani, CA Respondent by Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Date of hearing: 24/08/2026 Date of Pronouncement: 24/08/2026 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)Delhi [hereinafter referred to as (“Ld. NFAC”] vide order dated 17-10-2025 arising out the assessment order dated 10-03-2023 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (in short “the Act”) pertaining to A.Y. 2018-19. 2. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual. As per the information received to the department that the assessee has sold and purchased an immovable property to the tune of Rs.2,95,10.000/-, rental income received from House property of Rs.3,10,000/-, Professional fees receipts of Rs.62,000/- and foreign remittance has been sent Rs.87,50,000/-. The assessee did not file any return of income for the 1

ITA No.8291/Del2025 Manish Arora vs. ITO A.Y.2018-19 year under consideration. During the course of re-assessment proceedings as well as the proceedings initiated under section 148A(d) of the Act the assessee has not furnished any explanation with regard to the said transaction. Notices under section 142(1) were issued to the assessee. Further notice under section 148 of the act was issued but assessee did not reply. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment and assessed the total income at Rs.1,77,70,400/- of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred the appeal before Ld. NFAC, who vide order dated 17-10-2025 dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay. Being aggrieved the order of the Ld. NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the tribunal on the various grounds. 4. The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee without going the merit of the case. He further submitted that sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within time has been shown by the assessee. He further stated that assessee is NRI residing abroad and had not received the communication during the proceedings. The ld. DR of the Revenue submitted that no sufficient cause has been shown by the assessee. The appeal was rightly dismissed. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is evident from the order of the Ld. NFAC that the application for condonation of delay was dismissed because the assessee has failed to show the sufficient cause. Sufficient cause has shown by the assessee in filing the appeal before the Ld. NFAC, therefore, we condone the delay in preferring the appeal before the Ld. NFAC having been satisfied with the explanation so rendered by the assessee before the said authority.

ITA No.8291/Del2025 Manish Arora vs. ITO A.Y.2018-19 6. Since in the instant case the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay and ld. Assessing Officer passed the ex-parte assessment, therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also directed to appear before the ld. Assessing Officer and co-operate in the proceedings. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24.08.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (SUDHIR KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (JUDICIAL MEMBER) SR Bhatnagar Date: 24.09.2026 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT DELHI

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →