DEVENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD DAUSA, DAUSA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 660/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 July 2025AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA. No. 660/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Devendra Kumar Sharma बनाम ITO, Vill Post Khan Bhankri, Teh Vs. Ward Dausa, Dausa Dausa स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: EJTPS5571Q अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri R. S. Poonia, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 02/07/2025 उदघोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncemen1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay, holding that there was a reasonable cause for the delay and it was not intentional. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal ex-parte without a speaking order and thus remitted the case back for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 328 days. The delay was attributed to the assessee being from a small village and unaware of the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The Assessing Officer had passed an order under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal is condonable. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without a speaking order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 660/JP/2025

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Poonia, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@
Hearing: 02/07/2025Pronounced: 03/07/2025

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh euh"k cksjkM] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 660/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14 cuke Devendra Kumar Sharma ITO, Vill Post Khan Bhankri, Teh Vs. Ward Dausa, Dausa Dausa LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: EJTPS5571Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri R. S. Poonia, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 02/07/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement :03/07/2025 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: MANISH BORAD, AM

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A), NFAC dated 13.03.2024 arising out of the order for A.Y 2013-14 framed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act dated 28.09.2021 framed by ITO, Ward, Dausa.

2.

The registry has informed that there is a delay of 328 days in filing of the appeal before this Tribunal. Application for condonation for delay is stated that the assessee is from small village near Dausa and his dependent upon his tax consultant and was unaware about the impugned ex-parte order of ld. CIT(A). Ld. DR opposed the condonation of delay, I have carefully gone through the reasons mentioned in the affidavit filed for condonation of delay and observe that there is a reasonable cause which prevented the assessee from filing the appeal before this tribunal within permissible time limit. I also note that the assessee would not have gained from delay in filing the appeal. Since the delay is not intentional and therefore, taking liberal approach and following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025) INSC 382. I hereby condone the delay and admit the appeal.

3.

With the assistance of the both sides, I have gone throw the records carefully. The impugned order is ex-parte. Ld. CIT(A) has summarily dismissed the appeal without passing a speaking order as contemplated in section 250(6) of the Act. Ld. DR raised no objection if the issues raised in the instant appeal are restored to

4.

Considering the given facts and circumstances of the case, in the larger interest of justice and placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT(C) vs. Prem Kumar Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that ld. CIT(A), NFAC is obliged to dispose all the appeals on merits even an ex-parte order, I hereby remit back all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and to pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of being heard should be granted to the assessee. The assessee should also refrain from seeking unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 03/07/2025.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →