SURAT SINGH,BHIWADI vs. ITO WARD BHIWADI, BHIWADI

ITA 1248/JPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 October 2026AY 2015-166 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 400 days in filing the appeal, considering the assessee's age (75 years), lack of email know-how, and the possibility of negligence by his counsel. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A)'s order did not record satisfaction regarding the service of notices issued to the assessee. The Tribunal found sufficient cause to condone the delay, emphasizing the assessee's right to substantial justice. The Tribunal then heard the appeal on merits. The assessee contended that he was not served in the first appellate proceedings and that he is a senior citizen and non-filer who needs adequate opportunity. The Tribunal, finding merit in the assessee's argument regarding lack of proper service and the need for adequate opportunity, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the matter for a fresh decision after providing the appellant with adequate opportunity of being heard. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Surat Singh, is challenging an order dated January 17, 2025, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for Assessment Year 2015-16. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after obtaining information that the assessee sold immovable property for Rs. 32,33,200/- but did not file a return of income. As the assessee failed to comply with notices under Section 142(1), the AO made a best judgment assessment, taxing Rs. 32,33,200/- as long-term capital gain. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-appearance. The assessee then filed an appeal before the ITAT, which was delayed by 400 days.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated March 19, 2020, is without jurisdiction, rendering the reassessment proceedings and assessment order illegal, unlawful, bad in law, and void-ab-initio, due to non-compliance with Sections 147 to 151 of the Act? 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 32,33,200/- on account of Long Term Capital Gain? 3. Whether the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer is in violation of the principles of Natural Justice? Assessee's contentions: The notice under Section 148 is without jurisdiction. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition. The addition made by the AO violates principles of natural justice. The assessee also argued that he was not properly served in the first appellate proceedings, that he is a senior citizen (75 years old) and a non-filer, and that the delay in filing the appeal was due to his counsel's negligence and lack of email communication. The assessee relied on the fact that his postal address was provided in Form 35, not an email address, and that he does not operate an email ID. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue opposed the condonation of delay, arguing that the assessee neither appeared before the AO nor the CIT(A) despite filing an appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 147,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI KULDIP SINGH & SHRI PRAKASH, ACCOUNTANCT MEMBER

PER : KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

The Appellant, Surat Singh (hereinafter referred to as the ‘assessee’) by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 17.01.2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] qua assessment year 2015-16 on the grounds inter-alia that:- “1. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the notice issue u/s. 148 dt. 19.03.2020 is without juri iction as without following the provision of section 147 to 151 of I.T. Act, 1961. So, the notice u/s. 148 as well as consequential reassessment proceeding and assessment order is illegal,

I.T.A No. 1248/JPR/2026 Page No 2

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →