AJAY KUMAR,ALLAHABAD V. INCOME TAX OFFICE1(1), ALLAHABAD

ITA 34/ALLD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Ajay Kumar, a proprietor of M/s Raj Kumar and Co., who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention was regarding the assessment of income, where the Assessing Officer had significantly increased the declared income from Rs.10,83,960 to Rs.56,63,290, attributing an additional profit of Rs.45,79,325 by applying a net profit rate of 1.5% instead of the 0.23% disclosed by the assessee. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found procedural lapses in the CIT(A)'s handling of the case, particularly the failure to provide adequate opportunity and a reasoned decision, thus remanding the case for re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 705540 (ITAT-ALLAHABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: REVENUE DID NOT EXPRESS ANY; REVENUE; A.K. SINGH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"I.T.A. No.34/Alld/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.34/Alld/2025 Assessment year:2017-18 Shri Ajay Kumar 3543, Mutthiganj, Allahabad. PAN:AUQPK8089B Vs. Income Tax Officer-1(1), Allahabad (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA:J.M. This appeal vide I.T.A. No.34/Alld/2025 has been filed by the assessee pertaining to assessment year 2017-18 against impugned appellate order dated 29/11/2023 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1058292789(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. 2. This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section 253(3) of the I.T. Act. The assessee has submitted an application dated 14/02/2025 for condonation of delay in filing of the Appellant by None Respondent by Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. D.R. I.T.A. No.34/Alld/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 2 appeal pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeal for hearing. The learned Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to assessee’s application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. In view of the foregoing, and in specific facts and circumstances of the present appeal before us, the delay in filing of this appeal is condoned; and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and is proprietor of firm M/s Raj Kumar and Co. and derives income from trading of Dal and Dalhan for which regular books of account are maintained which are audited year after year. The assessee has filed his return of income disclosing income of Rs.10,83,960/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.56,63,290/- and made addition amounting to Rs.45,79,325/- on account of extra profit addition by applying net rate of 1.5 percent as against 0.23 percent disclosed by the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The order passed by the learned CIT(A) was ex-parte qua the assessee. 4. During the course of hearing, the assessee was represented by none. In the absence of any representation from assessee’s side, we heard learned Sr. D.R., who relied on the orders of the authorities below. On perusal of records, it is seen learned CIT(A) has passed order without affording sufficient time and opportunity to the assessee. It is also noted that the learned CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order on merits and dismissed the assessee’s appeal in a summary manner in violation of the provisions u/s 250(6) of the Act. The learned CIT(A) is duty bound under I.T.A. No.34/Alld/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 3 section 250(6) of the I.T. Act to pass a speaking order on various grounds of appeal, on merits, but learned CIT(A) failed to do so. The learned Sr. Departmental Representative for the Revenue left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. 5. We have heard learned Departmental Representative for Revenue and perused materials on record. In view of the foregoing and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, we set aside the impugned appellate order dated 29/11/2023 to the file of learned CIT(A) with the direction to pass speaking order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court on 04/07/2025) Sd/. Sd/. (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) (SUBHASH MALGURIA) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated:04/07/2025 *Singh Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., Allahabad "