ABHISHEK TOMAR,PANIPAT, HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD 1, PANIPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4081/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 August 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)4 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the NFAC and directed the NFAC to decide the appeal afresh. The assessee was granted liberty to furnish fresh evidence and grounds.

What were the facts?

The appeal pertains to AY 2017-18 and arises from an order confirming an addition made on account of cash deposits in a bank account. The assessee's appeal before the NFAC was dismissed in limine due to a delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the Tribunal was justified in directing the NFAC to condone the delay and decide the appeal afresh on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

For Appellant: Shri Shantanu Jain, Adv, Shri Gujeet Singh, CA
For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 13/08/2025Pronounced: 27/08/2025

O R D E R

1.

The appeal in AY 2017-18 arises out of the order of the ld. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC’, in short] in Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1072080105(1) Delhi dated 10.01.2025 against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 25.05.2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).

2.

At the outset, I find that there is a delay in filing of appeal by the assessee by 86 days before me. Considering the reasons adduced in the condonation petition supported with an affidavit placed on record, I am inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication.

3.

The only issue to be decided on merits in this appeal is as to whether the learned CITA was justified in confirming the addition made on account of cash deposit made in the bank account in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.

4.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. I find that the Learned NFAC had dismissed the appeal in limine by not condoning the delay in filing of appeal before it by 165 days. The reason adduced by the assessee in the condonation petition before me shall apply with equal force for the delay in filing of appeal before the Learned NFAC. Hence I direct the Learned NFAC to condone the delay, admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication and decide the same afresh in accordance with law. The assessee is at liberty to furnish fresh evidences, if any, and raise fresh grounds, if any, in support of his contentions. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the Learned NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments except due to exceptional or bonafide circumstances. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 27/08/2025.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →