SADHANA GUPTA,MAINPURI vs. ITO, WARD4(2),4, MAINPURI
Facts
The assessee preferred three appeals against orders that dismissed their first appeals for non-prosecution. These orders confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer for Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17. The assessee argued that the CIT(Appeals) passed ex-parte orders without affording proper opportunities for hearing.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, noting that the assessee was unaware of the impugned orders due to issues with their registered email ID. The Tribunal observed that the CIT(Appeals) passed ex-parte orders without discussing the merits of the case, contrary to Section 250(6) of the Act.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in passing ex-parte orders without affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee; and whether the delay in filing the appeals should be condoned.
Sections Cited
250, 69A, 147, 144, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 132, 133 & 134/Agr/2025 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17
Sadhna Gupta,, 1212-196, Vs. Income-tax Officer, Awadh Nagar, Mainpuri– Ward 4(2)(4), Mainpuri. 205001 (UP). PAN : ABYPG5475A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Prarthna Jalan, CA Department by Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR
Date of hearing 21.05.2025 Date of pronouncement 29.05.2025
ORDER Per:Sunil Kumar Singh, Judicial Member: These three appeals have been preferred by assessee against the separate impugned orders all dated 22.07.2024 passed in Appeals No.NFAC/2013-14/10193869, NFAC/2014-15/1019387 and NFAC/2015- 16/10193879 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment years [AY] 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 respectively, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s first appeals for non- prosecution, confirming the following additions made by the learned
ITA No. 132, 133 & 134/Agr/2025
Assessing Officer vide assessment orders dated 29.03.2022, 29.03.2022 and
30.03.2022 respectively passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B of the Act :
Additions made by AO and 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 confirmed by CIT(Appeals) Unexplained money on a/c of cash 1,04,76,914 1,41,48,286 1,47,35,213 deposits/credits in bank account u/s. 69A Undisclosed short term capital 8,46,000 4,60,000 - gains on sale of immovable property
Aggrieved by the impugned orders, the assessee has filed these
appeals on the ground, in addition to many other grounds, that the learned
CIT(A) has erred in passing the ex parte orders without affording proper
opportunities of being heard to the appellant/assessee.
Perused the records and heard the ld. Authorized Representative for
the assessee and the ld. Departmental representative for the Revenue.
Learned representative for the assessee has submitted that the
impugned orders have been passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals), ex parte without
affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Prayed to set
aside the impugned orders.
Learned DR has submitted that the assessee was provided sufficient
opportunity of hearing by learned CIT(Appeals) on various occasions, but for
no avail. Learned DR has supported the impugned order.
2 | P a g e
ITA No. 132, 133 & 134/Agr/2025
At the very outset, Ld. AR of the assessee prayed to condone the delay
of 173 days in filing each of the present appeals, on the ground that the delay
in filing these appeals was caused due to lack of knowledge of the impugned
orders, as the email ID registered on the portal was not of the appellant and
had no access to electronic communications. It was only when the demands
for payment were raised by the department, the appellant became aware of
the impugned orders and immediately took steps to file these appeals. The
delay is bona fide, hence, be condoned. Supported with assessee’s affidavit.
The facts supported with affidavit are uncontroverted. Hence, in the
interest of justice, we find sufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing
these appeals. We condone the delay accordingly in all these three appeals.
Perusal of the impugned orders shows that the appellant/assessee was
issued various notices by the first appellate authority for compliance on
04.06.2024, 12.06.2024 and 26.06.2024 in first appellate proceedings for all
the three assessment years under consideration, but for no avail. It is
however noticed that learned CIT(Appeals) has passed ex-parte impugned
orders without any discussion on the merits of the cases, whereas learned
CIT(Appeals) was expected to state the points for determination, decision
thereon and the reasons for the decision as provided u/s. 250(6) of the Act. In
the circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it just
and appropriate to afford last opportunity to the assessee and remit the 3 | P a g e
ITA No. 132, 133 & 134/Agr/2025
matters back to the files of learned CIT(Appeals) for adjudication on merits.
We order accordingly. We further direct the assessee to be diligent and
cooperative in attending the hearings and making submissions before the
learned CIT(Appeals) for the expeditious and effective disposal. Assessee
shall refrain from seeking any adjournment but for compelling and
unavoidable reasons. Needless to say that learned CIT(Appeals) shall ensure
the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeals are liable to
be allowed accordingly.
In the result, all the three appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
The impugned orders dated 22.07.2024 are set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29.05.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.05.2025 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra
4 | P a g e
