SURENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,GWALIOR vs. COMMISSIONER, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 572/AGR/2024Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 April 2025AY 2011-12Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and set aside the CIT(A)'s order, remanding the case back for de novo adjudication. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case on merits before the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a 74-day delay. The AO had previously made an addition of Rs. 17.75 Lacs for cash deposits due to a lack of satisfactory explanation.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned to allow the assessee to present its case on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AGRA

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

Pronounced: 22.04.2025

(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year:2011-12) बनाम/ Sh. Surendra Kumar Sharma Income-tax Officer, 354, Tansen Nagar, Gwalior. Ward 3(1), Gwalior. Vs. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ARMPS-4378-Q (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Rajendra Sharma, Adv. – Ld. AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 arises out of an order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [CIT(A)] on 28-04-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act on 20-11-2018. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of cash deposit for Rs.17.75 Lacs for want of any satisfactory explanation from the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) did not admit the appeal for want of condonation of delay of 74 days. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR has stated that the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case on merits and accordingly, prayed for another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

2.

Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice and considering the possibility of communication gaps during faceless regime, we deem it fit to afford another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its case on merits before Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the delay in first appeal stand condoned. The appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith.

3.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →