AJMER SINGH VIRK,KARNAL V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KARNAL, KARNAL

ITA 3192/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Ajmer Singh Virk against an ex-parte order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2011-12. The appeal was initially time-barred by 17 days, but the delay was condoned based on a medical certificate provided by the assessee. The main contention was that the assessee was not given a reasonable opportunity to present his case, as claimed by his representative, despite the department's assertion that multiple notices were issued. The Tribunal found that there was insufficient evidence to confirm that the notices were properly served, leading to the decision to set aside the previous order and remand the case for a new assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 472473 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: GURJEET SINGH; CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside
• Section: 148; 144

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िदʟी पीठ “एस एम सी”, िदʟी ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं.3192/िदʟी/2024 (िन.व. 2011-12) ITA No.3192/DEL/2024 (A.Y.2011-12) Ajmer Singh Virk, C/o. Sharma Associates, 493-L, 1st Floor, Model Town, Karnal, Haryana 132001 PAN: ATCPS-3602-H ...... अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Aaykar Bhawan, Sector-12, Karnal, Haryana 132001 ..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथŎ Ȫारा/ Appellant by : Shri Gurjeet Singh, Chartered Accountant ŮितवादीȪारा/Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 04.02.2025 घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 04.02.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against an ex-parte order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 18.04.2024, for assessment year 2011-12. 2. The appeal is time barred by 17 days. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay supported by Medical Certificate. After perusal of the same, I am satisfied that delay in filing of appeal is not intentional, but is for the reasons 2 ITA No.3192/DEL/2024 (AY 2011-12) stated in the condonation petition which appears to be bonafide. Hence, delay in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for hearing on merits. 3. Shri Gurjeet Singh, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the CIT(A) in an ex-parte proceedings has dismissed appeal of the assessee, without affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee. 4. Per contra, Shri Sanjay Kumar, representing the department submitted that multiple opportunities were given to the assessee by the CIT(A) vide notices dated 13.02.2024, 20.02.2024 and 07.03.2024. However, the assessee failed to respond to the notices issued by the CIT(A). 5. Both sides heard. A perusal of impugned order shows that the CIT(A) has mentioned that multiple notices/letters were issued to the assessee. However, it is not emanating from the order has to how these notices were issued, on which address they were sent and whether the notices issued by the CIT(A) were ever served upon the assessee. A further perusal of assessment order shows that the same has been passed u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act’). A specific query was made to the ld. Counsel for assessee as to why the assessee failed to participate in assessment proceedings. The ld. Counsel submitted that the notices issued by the AO were never served upon the assessee. Hence, the assessee failed to respond to the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act and subsequent notices. Considering entire facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to the AO for denovo assessment after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law. 3 ITA No.3192/DEL/2024 (AY 2011-12) 6. The assessee shall provide his current postal address as well as email ID for service of notice to the AO within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The assessee shall respond to notice(s), served by the AO, without fail. 7. In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on Tuesday the 04th day of February, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) ᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िदʟी/Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 04.02.2025 NV/- ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant , 2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. The PCIT 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी 5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, DELHI "