JAGDISH BENIWAL,GANDHIDHAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARMER, BARMER
In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 867/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur18 Aug 2025AY 2017-18
Bench: The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Moved A Condonation Petition Explaining That The Delay Occurred Due To The Assessee Being Unaware Of The Status Of The Appeal Before The Cit(A) & The Lapse On The Part Of His Erstwhile Authorised Representative, Who Failed To Communicate The Outcome Or Advise Timely Further Action. It Was Submitted That The Assessee Had Re-Engaged Counsel Only After Becoming Aware Of The Adverse Order & Immediate Steps Were Taken Thereafter To Prefer The Present Appeal.
For Appellant: Shri Chetan Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anuradha, Addl. CIT DR
Section 144
condone the delay of 289
days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal.
4. On merits, the appeal arises from an ex parte assessment order dated
23.12.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer under section 144 of the Act estimating gross profit @ 8% of the foreign turnover amounting to Rs.3,65,85,751/-
, resulting in an addition of Rs.26
