Dinesh Kumar Panwar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 44(6)

PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM:

The application for condonation of delay of 1 year and 301 days in filing appeal and the appeal filed by the assessee is against the order dated 02.01.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) arising out of assessment order dated 26.12.2019 of Ld. Assessing Officer/ITO, Ward 44(6), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘The AO’) u/s 144 of the Act for A.Y. 2017-18.

Brief facts of the case are that as per information, the assessee deposited Rs. 88,26,000/- during the demonetization period in his bank account. The assessee failed to file any online response and failed to file copy of ITR u/s 139 of the Act. The case was treated as non-filer. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee. The assessee failed to furnish reply. The proceedings u/s 144(1) of the Act were initiated. On completion of proceedings, Ld. AO vide order dated 26.12.2019 made addition of Rs. 1,16,52,475/- and Rs. 44,610/-.

Against order dated 26.12.2019 of Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A) which was dismissed vide order dated 02.01.2024.

Being aggrieved, the appellant/assessee filed application for condonation of delay of 1 year and 301 days in filing appeal and appeal.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that delay of 1 year and 301 days in filing appeal occurred due to death in family and non-awareness of the impugned order. The application is supported by affidavit. The explanation does not smack of malafides, as appellant has not gained anything by not filing appeal earlier. Therefore, the delay of 1 year and 301 days in filing appeal is condoned.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) vide ex parte order dismissed the appeal in violation of principle of natural justice. The matter may be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A).

Ld. Departmental Representative relied on impugned order.

From examination of the record in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) vide ex parte order dated 02.01.2024 dismissed the appeal for non-participation in appeal proceedings by the assessee and non-filing of documents in support of grounds of appeal.

In view of above material facts and in interest of justice, the impugned order dated 02.01.2024 of ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for afresh decision in accordance with law after affording fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The application for condonation of delay is allowed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.