SAJIDA BANO,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), JAIPUR
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, JAIPUR
Before: Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI & SHRI GAGAN GOYALSajida Bano, 57 B Khetdi House Ke Pass, Bai Pass Road, Nahari Ka, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur-302 016 PAN No.: AOSPB 4838H
PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M:
This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of NFAC, Delhi dated
23.03.2023 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -
2
2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a non filer. In this case, the reason u/s. 148 were recorded on the ground that during the year, the assessee has entered into purchase transaction of immovable property amounting to Rs. 7,00,000/- during the F.Y 2010-11 relevant for A.Y. 2011-12
relevant for A.Y. 2011-12. In this regard, the assessee was given an opportunity to explain the source of investment in purchase of immovable property of Rs. 7,
00,000/- during the year under consideration but not complied with the same.
Notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 27.03.2018, in response to the same the assessee had neither filed any return of income nor any written submission. Ultimately, the case of the assessee was assessed after making addition of Rs. 7, 00,000/- u/s. 69 of the Act. The assessee being aggrieved with the same preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT (A) who in turn dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The assessee being further aggrieved preferred the present appeal before us with the delay of 2188 days.
We have gone through the order of the AO, order of the ld. CIT (A) and submissions of the assessee along with grounds taken before us. As the matter is time barred in terms of filing of appeal before us. We deem it fit to examine the issue of condonation of delay first and then if required on merits. The assessee in an application submitted as below:-
3
“My Tax Consultant is change his contact no and office location and not attend the proceedings before CIT (A). I believe in my tax consultant that he is doing my proceeding work timely. But after received notice by hand I know that my tax consultant is not attending the proceedings before CIT (A). Now I hiring new tax consultant Mr. CA Saiyad Ali for further proceeding.
So Plz I requested to you take further action on my appeal.”
We have considered the above submissions of the assessee along with the observations made by the ld. CIT (A). It is observed that there was a delay in filing of appeal before the ld. CIT (A) also. Although the same was condoned by the ld. CIT (A) but as per para 4 (reproduced below) of the ld. CIT (A)’s order, again there was no compliance made by the assessee as reproduced hereunder: Date
Event
09.01.2021
First notice u/s 250 was issued for 25.01.2021 via e-mail.
25.01.2021
No written submissions were filed.
11.08.2021
Second notice u/s 250 was issued for 17.08.2021. 17.08.2021
No written submissions were filed.
16.12.2021
Third notice u/s 250 was issued for 27.12.2021. 27.12.2021
No written submissions were filed.
25.02.2022
Fourth notice u/s 250 was issued for 14.03.2022. 14.03.2022
No written submissions were filed.
03.06.2022
Fifth notice u/s 250 was issued for 14.06.2022. 14.06.2022
No written submissions were filed.
04.10.2022
Sixth notice u/s 250 was issued for 19.10.2022. 19.10.2022
No written submissions were filed.
19.02.2023
Final opportunity was provided to the appellant
Vide notice u/s 250 was issued 03.03.2023. 03.03.2023
Jaipur, िदनांक/Dated: 13/10/2025
Copy of the Order forwarded to:
अपीलाथŎ/The Appellant , 2. Ůितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुƅ CIT 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., Sr.DR., ITAT, 5. गाडŊ फाइल/Guard file.
BY ORDER,
////
(Asstt.