MAALDDIN,HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD 2(4) GURGAON, GURGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1620/DEL/2024Status: HeardITAT Delhi23 October 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the 182-day delay, finding that the assessee's illness prevented appearance before both the AO and CIT(A). Considering the material facts and in the interest of justice, the ITAT restored the matter to the file of the Ld. AO for a fresh decision in accordance with law.

What were the facts?

The assessee's return for AY 2017-18 was selected for scrutiny, leading to an assessment/penalty order dated 25.12.2019. The Ld. CIT(A) allowed condonation of a 33-day delay but dismissed the appeal ex-parte on 24.07.2023. The assessee then filed an appeal before the ITAT with a 182-day delay, citing illness.

What were the issues?

Condonation of delay due to illness and restoration of the case for fresh adjudication after an ex-parte dismissal by Ld. CIT(A) and non-appearance before AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Shri I.P. Bansal, Adv, Shri Vivek Bansal, Adv. and Sh. Vishal Chechi, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Amit Shukla, Sr.DR
Hearing: 23/10/2024Pronounced: 23/10/2024

(ASSESSMENT YEAR-2017-18) Maalddin ITO WARD 2(4), House No.268, GURGAON Tapkan (96), Vs. Tapkan, Mewat-122107 Haryana-122107 PAN:BPBPM8995K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri I.P. Bansal, Adv. Shri Vivek Bansal, Adv. and Sh. Vishal Chechi, Adv. Respondent by Shri Amit Shukla, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 23/10/2024 Date of Pronouncement 23/10/2024 O R D E R

PER VIMAL KUMAR,JM:

1.

The application for Condonation of delay of 182 days in filing appeal and the appeal of the Assessee are against order dated 24/07/2023 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Gurgaon, passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] arising out of Assessment Order dated 25.12.2019 of the Assessing Officer(hereinafter referred as Ld. A.O.) for Assessment Year 2017-18. Page1 2ITA No.1619/Del/2024 Maalddin vs. NFAC 2. The appellant has submitted that he has suffering from heart trouble and was in hospital for undergoing angioplasty. Copies of treatment record have been filed. Explanation for Condonation of delay in filing appeal does not smack of malafides as nothing has been gained by the appellant/assessee. Therefore, the application for Condonation of delay in delay of 182 days in filing appeal is condoned.

3.

Brief facts of case are that appellant/assessee filed return of income of Rs.4,85,130/- for Assessment Year 2017-18 on 04/01/2018. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS. Notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 10/08/2018 by the ITO, Ward-1(1), Gurugram. The case was transferred from ITO, Ward-1, Gurugram, to ITO Ward No.2(4), Gurugram. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act were issued to assessee and 21/02/2019 or 26/08/2019 but no response was received. Ld. AO completed penalty proceeding vide order dated 25.12.2019.

4.

The appellant/assessee preferred application for Condonation of delay of 33 days in filing appeal and appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Ld(CIT(A) allowed application for Condonation of delay of 33 days in filing appeal and dismissed the appeal vide order dated 24.07.2023.

5.

Learned Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that there is delay of 182 days in filing appeal due to illness. Because of illness the appellant could not appear before 3ITA No.1619/Del/2024 Maalddin vs. NFAC the Ld. CIT(A). Learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex- parte. So, the matter may be restored to file of Learned CIT(A) for fresh decision.

6.

Learned Departmental Representative for Revenue submitted that appellant despite notices did not appear before Ld. CIT)A).

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →