GOBIND INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BARABANKI vs. DCIT/ACIT-3,LUCKNOW-NEW, LUCKNOW

PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.

(A)
This appeal vide I.T.A. No.371/Lkw/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017-18 against impugned appellate order dated
26/07/2024
(DIN
&
Order
No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-
25/1067068003(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short].

(A.1) This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section 253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted application, duly supported by affidavit, for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeal for hearing. The learned Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any Appellant by Shri Dinesh Agarwal, C.A.
Respondent by Shri Amit Kumar, Addl. CIT (D.R.)

I.T.A. No.371/Lkw/2025
Assessment Year:2017-18
2

objection to assessee’s application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. In view of the foregoing, and in specific facts and circumstances of the present appeal before us, the delay in filing of this appeal is condoned; and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

(B)
The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 29/10/2017 declaring total income at Rs.41,10,830/-. In the case of the assessee, the Assessing
Officer completed the assessment proceedings and passed assessment order dated 17/05/2023 under section 147 read with section 144/144B of the Act and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,72,60,830/- by making addition of Rs.1,31,50,000/- under section 69A of the I.T. Act.
Being aggrieved with the addition made by the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the aforesaid impugned appellate order passed by learned CIT(A).

(C)
At the time of hearing before the Tribunal, learned A.R. for the assessee submitted that Assessing Officer has passed ex-parte order under section 144 of the I.T. Act without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee and learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine on limitation ground refusing to condone delay in filing of appeal. Learned A.R. for the assessee submitted that the issue in dispute may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for passing fresh order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Learned Departmental
Representative relied on the assessment order and the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) and left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. On perusal of records, it is seen that the Assessing Officer has passed ex-parte

I.T.A. No.371/Lkw/2025
Assessment Year:2017-18
3

order under section 144 of the I.T. Act without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee and learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine on limitation ground refusing to condone delay in filing of appeal. On perusal of records, we find that this was a fit case to condone delay by learned CIT(A). In view of the foregoing, the order of learned CIT(A) is set aside and issue in dispute is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo speaking order on merits of the case in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

(D)
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

(Order pronounced in the open court on 28/11/2025) . .
(SUBHASH MALGURIA) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA)
Judicial Member Accountant Member

Dated:28/11/2025
*Singh

Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. Concerned CIT
4. D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow