MOHAR SINGH GOUR,BHOPAL vs. ITO NFAC, DELHI
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which dismissed their first appeal. The delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal was 149 days, attributed to the assessee being unaware of the proceedings due to incorrect email communication and medical reasons. The assessee claimed to be an agriculturist with only agricultural income.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay, holding that the assessee had shown sufficient cause due to medical grounds and lack of proper notice. The Tribunal found that the impugned order did not examine the merits of the case and was passed in violation of natural justice principles.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and whether the assessment order and subsequent dismissal by the CIT(A) were valid, considering principles of natural justice and the nature of the assessee's income.
Sections Cited
253, 147, 148, 144, 144B, 139, 246A, 249(4)(b), 250, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M JOSHI
Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.:
The assessee has filed the present appeal Under Section
253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the
“Act” for sake of brevity) before this Tribunal as and by way of
Second appeal under the Act. The assessee is aggrieved by the
order bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/
1060262583(1) dated 30.01.2024 of Ld. CIT(A) passed u/s 250
of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned
order”. The relevant Assessment Year is 2013-14 and the
Page 1 of 10
Mohar Singh Gour ITA Nos. 649 & 650/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2013-14
corresponding previous year period is from 01.04.2012 to
31.03.2013.
FACTUAL MATRIX
2.1 Condonation of Delay
2.2 At the outset and at the threshold the Registry has pointed
out that there is a delay of 149 days in preferring this appeal. It
is noticed that the “Impugned order” is dated 30.01.2024. The
appeal is e-filed on 26.08.2024. The appeal before this Tribunal is
required to be filed within a period of 60 days from date of
receipt of “impugned order” which date in Form No.36 is shown
as 30.01.2024. There is a very brief application on record of this
Tribunal wherein condonation of delay of 149 days as pointed out
by registry is sought to be condoned by this Tribunal. Prima facie
it is stated that e-mail id as per records does not belong to the
assessee nor his counsel consequently assessee was unaware of
the 1st appellate proceedings hence the delay be condoned as
prima facie there is a case to meet. In the paper book filed from
pages 38 to 73 which are photo copy of medical records evidences
that the assessee is sick person and is not medically fit and
active. Prayer for condonation of delay was thus made during the
Page 2 of 10
Mohar Singh Gour ITA Nos. 649 & 650/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2013-14
hearing held on 02.06.2025 and it was stated at bar that an
affidavit is placed on (sent on speed post Saturday i.e.
30.05.2025) record substantiating the “sufficient cause” in the
condonation of delay application. Per contra Ld. DR has left it to
this Tribunal’s wisdom to take appropriate call with regard to
delay as per law. We after perusing the records including
affidavit and after hearing rival submissions are of the considered
opinion that the assessee has shown both prima facie case as
well as medical grounds as “sufficient cause” in condonation of
delay of 149 days. Accordingly this tribunal condones the delay.
Appeal is admitted and taken up for hearing.
2.3 Since in the both the appeals common question arises with
consent of the parties they are being heard together and is being
disposed off by this common order.
ITA No.649/Ind/2024 (Assessment Year 2013-14)
2.4 That as and by way of an assessment order bearing No.
ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1053006826(1) dated 19.05.2023
the income of the assessee was computed as Rs. Two crores u/s
147 r.w.s. 144/144B of the Act. There is no return of income
Page 3 of 10
Mohar Singh Gour ITA Nos. 649 & 650/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2013-14
filed u/s 139 nor u/s 148. The said assessment order is
hereinafter referred to as the “impugned assessment order”.
2.4 That the assessee being aggrieved by the “impugned
assessment order” prefers first appeal u/s 246A of the Act
before Ld. CIT(A) who by the “impugned order” has dismissed
the first appeal of the assessee on the ground specified therein.
The core reason being that by virtue of Section 249(4)(b) the
assessee was required to pay an amount equal to the amount of
advance tax as the same is not paid and hence appeal is not
admitted and is dismissed for statistical purpose.
2.5 That the assessee being aggrieved by the “impugned order”
has preferred this instant second appeal before this Tribunal and
has raised following grounds of appeal in Form 36 against the
“impugned order” which are as under:-
“1. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the very initiation proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and issuance of notice under section 148 in bad in law and invalid. 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Assessing Officer merely on the basis of opinion without any corroborative evidence has added income of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- in the hands of assessee as short term capital gains and the Learned CIT Appeals has dismissed the appeal file against the
Page 4 of 10
Mohar Singh Gour ITA Nos. 649 & 650/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2013-14
said assessment order which is bad in law and should be deleted which is bad in law and should be deleted. 3. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Assessing Officer without proper enquiries and investigation considered that the said property was capital asset and attracted capital gains which is erroneous and invalid in nature and the Learned CIT Appeals has dismissed the appeal file against the said assessment order which is erroneous and unjust. 4. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the order under section 144 and under section 250 is passed in haste without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 5. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the appellant was not required to pay any taxes since he had only agricultural income in the relevant assessment year thus dismissal of appeal on account of non payment of advance tax is bad in law and erroneous. 6. That, the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter vary and or delete all or any of the above grounds.
Record of Hearing
3.1 The Ld. AR for and on behalf of the assessee appeared
before us and the Ld. DR for and on behalf of the Revenue too
appeared before us. Both the parties were given equal
opportunities to present their respective cases and were treated
equally. The Ld. AR at the outset and at the threshold contended
that the “impugned order” is bad in law and illegal. It is also
passed in the violation of the principles of natural justice and is
therefore null and void. The Ld. AR then brought to our notice
Page 5 of 10
Mohar Singh Gour ITA Nos. 649 & 650/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2013-14
that the assessee is an agriculturist by profession. He has
agriculture income only consequently he is not liable in law to
pay any taxes on income and therefore the question of paying any
advance tax on income is ruled out completely. The core ground
on which the 1st appeal is dismissed is non payment of advance
tax. The Ld. AR in support of his contention has placed reliance
on paper book from pages 1 to 114. The Ld. AR also informed us
that the assessee has made an application to Registrar, Land
Records for supplying true copy of registered deeds for “subject
land in issue” to demonstrate that fact that the subject lands are
agriculture lands and upon its sale no capital gain liability arises
on the assessee. It was also contended that “subject lands”
basis which capital gain liability is calculated by Ld.AO in the
“impugned assessment order” are in fact belongs to his father
and has ancestral lineage. Per contra Ld. DR for and on behalf of
the Revenue contended that “impugned order” and so also
“impugned assessment order” somehow or the other has not
taken into consideration the entire gamut of the facts and
circumstances of the case as is presented to this Tribunal today
during the course of the hearing. The documents which are
Page 6 of 10
Mohar Singh Gour ITA Nos. 649 & 650/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2013-14
placed now in the paper book were not so placed in the earlier
proceedings and Ld. AR still desires to place some additional
material, documents and evidence in support of her case as is
placed now. Hence it would be in fitness of things that matter be
relegated back to the file of Ld. Assessing Officer for fresh
adjudication and adjudgement so that income of the assessee is
determined judiciously in accordance with law after appropriate
opportunities are provided by Ld. Assessing Officer including a
hearing. The Ld. AR in the rejoinder argument emphatically
contended that “impugned order” is passed in violation of the
principles of natural justice as no notice came to the assessee.
Further e-mail address in Form No.35 belongs to someone else
probably the earlier counsel who was engaged by the assessee.
The “impugned order” however was received by the assessee by
speed post. The Ld. DR however has not refuted this factual
assertion made by the Ld. AR during the course of hearing save
and except that it would be just fair and convenient that matter
be relooked afresh by Ld. Assessing Officer on denovo basis.
Observations,findings & conclusions.
Page 7 of 10
Mohar Singh Gour ITA Nos. 649 & 650/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2013-14
4.1 We now have to adjudge and adjudicate the present appeal
filed by the revenue on basis of the records of the case and
contentions canvassed before us during the course of hearing. In
brief we have to decide the legality, validity and the proprietery of
the “impugned order”.
4.2 We have carefully perused the records of the case as
presented to this tribunal by both Ld. AR and Ld. DR to
determine the legality, validity of the “Impugned Order” basis
law and by following due process of law.
4.3 We basis records of the case and so also after hearing and
upon examining the contentions of both Ld. AR and Ld. DR are of
the considered opinion that the “impugned order” has not just
examined the merits of the case as is contemplated by law u/s
250(6) of the Act. Further the assessee was in dark with regard
to first appellate proceedings and no notice(s) came to him as e-
mail id on Form No.35 belonged to earlier counsel or someone
else who he does not even know.
4.4 In the premises drawn up by us, under these peculiar facts
and the circumstances of the case we set aside the “impugned
order” and remand the case back to the file of Ld. Assessing
Page 8 of 10
Mohar Singh Gour ITA Nos. 649 & 650/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2013-14
Officer to do fresh assessment on denovo basis and compute
correct income of the assessee according to law. The assessee is
directed to give his correct e-mail address and so also of his
counsel so that fresh notice(s) could be issued for hearing to
them. The assessee is also directed to update his profile. The
assessee is directed to cooperate with the department of Income
Tax and to provide to them all necessary and required
documents, papers and evidences in such a manner that his total
income exigible to tax is calculated and assessed according to
law.
Order
5.1 In the premises impugned order is set aside as and by way
of remand on denovo basis back to the file of Ld. AO.
5.2 Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
ITA No.650/Ind/2024 (Assessment Year 2013-14)
As the facts, issues and circumstances in ITA No.
650/Ind/2024 are similar/pari materia to that of ITA
No.649/Ind/2024 24, therefore, our findings given in ITA
No.649/Ind/2024 would apply mutatis-mutandis to ITA
Page 9 of 10
Mohar Singh Gour ITA Nos. 649 & 650/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2013-14
No.650/Ind/2024 also. Accordingly,ITA No.650/Ind/2024
is too also allowed for statistical purposes and
“impugned order” therein is too set aside as and by way
of remand on denovo basis back to the file of Ld. AO.
Order pronounced in open court on 05.06.2025.
Sd/- Sd/-
(BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI) (PARESH M JOSHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Indore िदनांक / Dated : 05/06/2025 Dev/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order COPY Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Page 10 of 10