DALBIR SINGH ,PINJORE, PANCHKULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI A.D.JAIN & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
आदेश/ORDER
PER A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT
The present appeal has been preferred by the
assessee against the order passed by the ld.
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC, Delhi dated
26.10.2023 pertaining to 2012-13 assessment year.
The assessee in this appeal has raised the following
ITA 76/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 2
grounds of appeal :
“1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the initiation of proceedings under section 148 in as much as there was no escapement of income leading to a reason to belief and as such the re-opening is illegal, arbitrary and unjustified. 2. That the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that no notice under section 148 was ever served on the assessee and as such the order passed is Illegal arbitrary and unjustified. 3. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law as well as on facts in as much as there has been no reason to believe that there was an escapement of income in as much as the reasons recorded arc based only on borrowed information and as such the assessment order passed is illegal, arbitrary and unjustified. 4. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred .in upholding the addition of Rs.61,97,798/- made on account of alleged unexplained sale of immovable property which is arbitrary and unjustified. 5. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income. Tax (Appeals) has erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the addition of Rs. 61,97,798/- treating agricultural land sold to be a Capital Asset especially when a specific ground of appeal in this regard was raised before him stating that the land was situated beyond the specified municipal limits which is arbitrary and unjustified.
On scrutiny, it is found that there is a delay of 29 days,
as pointed out by the Registry, in filing the appeal before
this Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application for
condonation of delay alongwith his affidavit, explaining the
reasons for the delay occurred in filing the present appeal.
The contents of the affidavit of the assessee are given below :
That I had filed an appeal against the assessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act before the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi for the Assessment Year 2012-13.
ITA 76/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 3 2. That the appeal was decided by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC) vide order dated 26.10.2023 ex-parte.
That an appeal against the order of Commissioner Tax(Appeals) was filed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh on 23.01.2024 which was late by 29 days 4. That 1 am an agriculturist and not much educated and also a senior citizen. 5. That I had filed the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal).NFAC on the basis of the password and email address of Shri Satish Kanojia who used to look after my income tax case. 6. That being not much educated, I did not see the SMS, if any. received from the Income tax Department/CTT(A) and Shri Satish Kanojia, whose e- mail was given to the Department did not inform me of any mail received on his e-mail from the IT Department or CIT(A). 7. That Shri Salish Kanojia changed the password/Login Id and as such the Notices received on my profile also could not be accessed 8. That I was informed by Shri Salisli Kanojia on 16.01.2021 regarding the dismissal of my IT Appeal by the CIT(A). I obtained the login Id and password immediately, I contacted my Advocate and on checking the portal, it was seen that the appellate order dismissing my appeal had been passed by the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi on 26.10.2023. 9. That the SMS/email from the Income Tax Department regarding notices and passing of the order by the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi could not be seen/accessed by me being not much educated. 10. That the appeal was filed before the Hon'ble ITAT, Chandigarh Benches, Chandigarh against the order passed by the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi on 23.01.2024 though belatedly for the reasons mentioned above.”
Heard. After taking into consideration the contents of
the application and the affidavit of the assessee, we are
satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause
from filing the appeal in time. Even otherwise, the assessee
cannot be said to stand to gain anything by deliberately
delaying the filing of the appeal before this Tribunal.
ITA 76/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 4 Therefore, in the interest of justice, the delay of 29 days
caused in filing the present appeal is condoned.
The assessee in this appeal has contested the action of 5.
the Assessing Officer in passing the order under Section 147
r.w.s. 144 and also the action of the ld.CIT(A) in confirming
the action of the AO affording reasonable opportunity of
being heard to the assessee. The ld. Counsel for the
assessee has stated that there was no service of notice and
as such the proceedings under Section 148 were illegal and
bad in law. It is further stated that the ld. CIT(A) has erred
in law as well as on facts in upholding the initiation of
proceedings under Section 148 of the Act.
Heard. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our
attention to order of the Assessing Officer confirmed by the
ld. CIT(A), to submit that the same is an ex-parte order. He
has submitted that the Assessing Officer has summarily
rejected the application of the assessee without giving any
opportunity of hearing to the assessee to present its case.
He has submitted that no notice of date of hearing was
served by the Assessing Officer, either through physical
mode or through e-mail etc. The ld. Counsel for the assessee
ITA 76/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 5
has requested that the assessee may be given opportunity to
present its case.
The ld. DR has relied on the impugned order.
We have heard the rival contentions. In the facts and
circumstances of the present case, we are of the considered
opinion that the assessee deserves to be given appropriate
opportunity to present his case. Therefore, the order of the
ld. CIT(A) is not sustainable in the eyes of law. The same is
hereby set aside with a direction to the CIT(A) to decide the
appeal of the assessee afresh after giving proper and
adequate opportunity to the assessee to present his case.
The ld. CIT(A) will serve notice of hearing through physical
mode as well as through electronic mode upon the assessee.
The assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh
proceedings before the CIT(A).
The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for
statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 15th October,2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (KRINWANT SAHAY) (A.D.JAIN ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER “Poonam”
ITA 76/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 6
आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 1. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 2. आयकरआयु�त/ CIT 3. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 4. गाड�फाईल/ Guard File 5.
आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar
