SH. HARI RAM TANWAR,DIWAKARI, ALWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), ALWAR, ALWAR

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, ‘’SMC” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 114/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14 cuke Hari Ram Tanwar The ITO Diwakari, Alwar Vs. Ward 1(1) Alwar- 301 001 (Raj) Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFDPT 2147 M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Mrs. Monisha Chaudhary Addl. CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 19/03/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 27 /03/2024 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 24-11-2023, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2013-14. 2.1 At the outset of the hearing, the Bench noted that there is delay of 15 days in filing the appeal by the assessee for which the assessee filed an application dated 07-02-2024 for condonation of delay alongwith affidavit of assessee Shri Hari Ram who mainly deposed as under:-

2 ITA NO. 114/JP/2024 HARI RAM TANWAR VS ITO, WARD 1(1), ALWAR ‘’7 That I approached many times to my earlier Advocate Shri Rajeev Sharma to know about the status of my case but he had not informed properly to me. Thereafter, the first week of Jan 2023, he informed that he cannot handle my case and I can appoint another CA or advocate for this case. Thereafter, I contacted my known person Shri Duli Chand who had retired from Head Department advised me to contact CA Mukesh Gupta, Alwar. Thereafter I met CA Mukesh Gupta who asked me to collect the bank statement of relevant year. I obtained the bank statement on 22-01-2024 and provided the same to CA Mukesh Gupta, Alwar. Thereafter on 30-01-2014 he changed my primary registered mail and primary registered mobile no. and advised me to file appeal before ITAT with application for condonation of delay. Accordingly, I am now filing appeal before Hon’ble ITAT with request to condone the delay in filing the appeal.’’

2.2 On the other hand, the ld. DR objected to such delay made by the assessee in filing the appeal. 2.3 The Bench has heard both the parties and perused the affidavit of the assessee and feel that there is a merit in the submission of the assessee and thus in view of the affidavit of the assessee, the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned. 3.1 Further the Bench at the time of hearing of the appeal noted that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non-explaining the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) with following narration. ‘’…46 The appellant has not explained this delay in filing of appeal and has therefore failed to discharge the onus case upon it.

3 ITA NO. 114/JP/2024 HARI RAM TANWAR VS ITO, WARD 1(1), ALWAR Therefore, after careful consideration of the above narrated facts and circumstances of the case, judicial principles laid down by the above quoted judgements, it is clear that the appellant has failed to furnish sufficient and reasonable cause explaining the delay hence, the instant appeal filed after the expiry of due date is barred by limitation and not admitted. In view of the foregoing, the appeal is dismissed. 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.’’

3.2 After hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, it is noted that the assessee has filed the written submission mainly praying that the ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in not deciding the addition of Rs.14,80,200- made by the AO treating the cash deposit in the bank account as unexplained for which that the ld. DR opposed the submission of the assessee. The Bench also feels that one more chance may be given to the Assessee to contest the case before the ld.CIT(A) and the appeal is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication and the assessee will submit the necessary documents / evidences concerning the above mentioned appeal. However, for lethargic and negligent action on the part of the assessee, therefore a cost of Rs.2,000/- is imposed upon the assessee and the same shall be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund and copy of the same shall be submitted to the ld CIT(A) for proof and thus the appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide it

4 ITA NO. 114/JP/2024 HARI RAM TANWAR VS ITO, WARD 1(1), ALWAR afresh by providing one more opportunity of hearing, however, the assessee will not seek any adjournment on frivolous ground and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. Thus the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 3.3 Before parting, the Bench makes it clear that its decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. 4.0 In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced in the open court on 27 /03/2024. Sd/- ¼lanhi xkslkbZ½ (Sandeep Gosain) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 27/03/2024 *Mishra आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. The Appellant- Shri Hari Ram Tanwar, Alwar 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward 1(1), Alwar 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No.114/JP/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेजज. त्महपेजतंत