IRFAN AHMED,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEHRADUN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 217/DDN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 April 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, directing the CIT(A) to first condone the delay and admit the appeal. The assessee was to be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an illiterate senior citizen running a roadside vegetable business, failed to appear for assessment proceedings. The assessment order, sent to an incorrect email ID, resulted in a significant addition on account of cash deposits. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal due to delay without considering the reasons provided by the assessee, and whether substantial justice requires condonation of delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI

For Respondent: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. DR
Hearing: 19/03/2025Pronounced: 09/04/2025

O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in AY 2017-18, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC’, in short] in appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1066468688(1) dated 08.07.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 15.11.2019 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward-1(1)(3), Dehradun (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite issuance of notice. Hence, we proceed to dispose of this appeal by hearing the ld DR based on the materials available on record.

3.

The only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition made on account of cash deposits in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.

4.

We find that there was delay in filing the appeal by the assessee before the ld CIT(A). The ld CIT(A) does not even state the number of days of delay before him. The assessee had submitted that he is an old illiterate and senior citizen carrying on road side business of agricultural produces of vegetables and fruits. He used to file income tax return through a person who visits the road side business. The assessee neither has a shop to do his business and nor has any computer or email. The person through whom the ITR was filed, his email ID was mentioned in the ITR. Hence, the assessment order went to the email ID of the said person. Thereafter, the assessee came to know that an assessment order has been passed making a huge addition on account of cash deposits. Thereafter, he engaged a new professional Chartered Accountant Mr. Agarwal and filed an appeal before the ld CIT(A). It was submitted that the ld CIT(A) never asked any question regarding condonation of delay even though the same was adopted along with memorandum of appeal before the ld CIT(A).

5.

We find that the ld CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal by not condoning the delay. In the interest of substantial justice, considering the reasons adduced by the assessee, we are inclined to restore this appeal to the file of the ld CIT(A) for de novo adjudication in accordance with law with a direction to first condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee and thereafter adjudicate in accordance with law. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, the grounds raised are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 09/04/2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →