JARNAIL SINGH, MOHALI,MOHALI vs. JAO ITO WARD-6(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च᭛डीगढ़ ᭠यायपीठ “एस.एम.सी” , च᭛डीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCHES, “SMC” CHANDIGARH
HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE
᮰ी िवᮓम ᳲसह यादव, लेखा सद᭭य
BEFORE: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM
आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 647/Chd/2025
िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2011-12
Jarnail Singh
House No. 14, Village
Shingariwala, Mullanpur,
Mohali
बनाम
The JAO ITO
Ward-6(1), Chandigarh
˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: CZFPS2599R
अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant
ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent
िनधाᭅᳯरती कᳱ ओर से/Assessee by :
Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate
राज᭭व कᳱ ओर से/ Revenue by :
Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21/08/2025
उदघोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 22/08/2025
आदेश/Order
PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM
This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld.
CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dt. 03/10/2023 pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay in filing the present appeal as pointed out by the Registry. In this regard, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has moved an application seeking condonation of delay and has also filed an affidavit and our reference was drawn to the contents of the affidavit so filed by the assessee. It was submitted by the ld AR that the assessee is an agriculturist and an illiterate person not well versed about the technicalities of the Income
Tax Law therefore to handle his tax matters, he has appointed a tax Counsel and was under the impression that the matter has been duly attended to.
However, the assessee subsequently came to know that the matter could not 2
be attended to properly. Further, it was submitted that though some of the notices were issued at the email id of the Counsel, other notices were issued at some other email id’s which does not belongs to the assessee. It was submitted that the AO has made a huge addition of Rs. 20,50,000/- towards cash deposit in the bank account maintained by the assessee and assessee wishes to contest the said addition and his seriousness about prosecuting the present appeal and therefore in the interest of substantial justice, the delay so happened in filing the present appeal may be condoned and the appeal of the assessee be admitted. It has been further submitted that the assessee be allowed one more opportunity and the matter be set-aside to the file of the AO.
3. The Ld. DR is heard who has submitted that there is a substantial delay in filing the present appeal. It was further submitted that the assessee has been provided more than adequate opportunity by the AO as well as by the Ld.
CIT(A). However the assessee has been totally non-compliant. He accordingly relied on the order of the lower authorities.
4. I have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is noted that the assessee is an illiterate agriculturist carrying out agriculture activities and has deposited certain cash in his bank account. On receipt of the tax notice, he had appointed a Counsel to look after his tax matters. However due to lack of diligence on the part of the Counsel, the matter could not be attended to in a proper manner which has resulted in passing of the ex-parte order and delay in filing of the present appeal. Once the assessee came to know about of the impugned order, he took necessary steps in terms of appointing another Counsel and has filed the present appeal.
What is relevant for examining the condonation prayer is the reasonableness of the explanation so submitted by the assessee more than the period of the delay. In the instant case, no doubt there has been a delay, at the same time, I find that the assessee has been diligent in attending to his tax matters by 3
appointing a Counsel and later on, where he came to know that there is lack of diligence on part of his Counsel, he took immediate steps and appointed another Counsel and has filed the present appeal. Further, the Courts have held that substantial justice shall prevail over the technicalities and the assessee cannot be penalized for lack of action on part of the Counsel. Considering the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, the delay so happened in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.
5. Further, given that there is no finding on merits of the case and the ld AR has stated at the Bar that the assessee is serious about prosecuting the matter and shall file the necessary explanation/documentation where given one more opportunity, the matter is remitted back to the file of the AO to examine the matter afresh after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
(Order pronounced in the open Court on 22/08/2025 ) िवᮓम ᳲसह यादव
(VIKRAM SINGH YADAV)
लेखा सद᭭य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AG
Date: 22/08/2025
आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ/ The Appellant
2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/ The Respondent
3. आयकर आयुᲦ/ CIT
4. आयकर आयुᲦ (अपील)/ The CIT(A)
5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च᭛डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH
6. गाडᭅ फाईल/ Guard File
आदेशानुसार/ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार/