ALKA YADAV,GURGAO V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) GURGAON, GURGAON

ITA 1769/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Alka Yadav, the appellant, contesting an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/CIT(A) which dismissed her appeal as barred by limitation without providing her an opportunity to explain the delay. The original assessment order was passed by the Income Tax Officer under sections 143(3)/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was also contested for being barred by limitation and for not serving a notice of demand. The Tribunal noted the absence of a notice of demand under section 156 of the Act, which the assessee argued made the assessment order itself barred by limitation. The Tribunal decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough re-examination after hearing the assessee's explanations regarding the delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 793663 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 22-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANISH GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: S AJAY WADHWA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Borrowed satisfaction

Judgement Text

"ITANo.1769/Del/2025 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1769/Del/2025 िनधा रणवष /Assessment Year: 2012-13 ALKA YADAV, Ground Floor, C-06, Block C, South City 2, Sector-49, Gurgaon, Haryana. PAN No.ABPPY9248J बनाम Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, Ward 1(1), Gurgaon, Haryana. अपीलाथ\u0014 Appellant \u0016\u0017यथ\u0014/Respondent Assessee by S/Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. Shivam Garg, Adv. & Harsh, Adv. Revenue by Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR सुनवाईक\bतारीख/ Date of hearing: 18.08.2025 उ\u000eोषणाक\bतारीख/Pronouncement on 26.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi dated 23.08.2024 for the AY 2012-13. The assessee in her appeal raised the following grounds: - Printed from counselvise.com ITANo.1769/Del/2025 2 1. “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre u/s 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the AY 2012-13 dated 23.08.2024 is illegal, bad in law, and in contravention of the applicable provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and therefore the same deserves to be set aside. 2. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order dated 23.08.2024 passed by the NFAC/CIT(A) is patently illegal, erroneous and bad in law as it suffers from violation of principle of natural justice. 3. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, NFAC/CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limne considering it to be barred by limitation. 4. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, NFAC/CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee as barred by limitation without providing an opportunity to the assessee to explain the delay. 5. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, NFAC/CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee as barred by limitation without appreciating the fact that no notice of demand was served upon the assessee. 6. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, NFAC/CIT(A) erred in affirming the order of Ld. Assessing Officer passed u/s 143(3)/148 of the Act dated 27.12.2019 without appreciating the fact that the assessment order is itself barred by limitation as no notice of demand was served upon the assessee within the limitation prescribed u/s 153. 7. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, NFAC/CIT(A) erred in affirming the order of the Ld. AO passed u/s 143(3)/148 of the Act dated 27.12.2019 without appreciating the fact that the reopening/s 148 is itself illegal, erroneous and bad in law as it was done on Printed from counselvise.com ITANo.1769/Del/2025 3 the basis of incorrect information, borrowed satisfaction without application of independent mind and was merely a verification exercise. 8. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, NFAC/CIT(A) erred in affirming the order of the Ld. AO passed u/s 143(3)/148 of the Act dated 27.12.2019 without appreciating the fact that the reopening u/s 148 is itself illegal, erroneous and bad in law as it was done without obtaining approval of prescribed authority u/s 151. 9. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, NFAC/CIT(A) erred in affirming the order of the Ld. AO passed u/s 143(3)/148 of the Act dated 27.12.2019 without appreciating the fact the approval granted u/s 151 of the Act is mechanical in nature. 10. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case the assessment order dated 27.12.2019 as affirmed by the NFAC/CIT(A) is illegal and void ab initio as it was passed without serving the mandatory notice of sec. 143(2) upon the assessee. 11. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, NFAC/CIT(A) erred in affirming the addition of Rs.80,60,500/- made by the Ld. AO vide order dated 27.12.2019 considering it to be long term capital gain on the sale of property. 12. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, NFAC/CIT(A) erred in affirming the addition made by the Ld. AO which was made merely on the basis of suspicion, conjecture and surmises. 13. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, remove, resign, forgo or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal, which are without prejudice to one another, before or at the time of hearing of the appeal in the interest of natural justice.” Printed from counselvise.com ITANo.1769/Del/2025 4 2. This appeal is filed by the Assessee with a delay of 142 days and the assessee filed petition for condonation of delay explaining the delay in filing before the Tribunal. The assessee also filed an affidavit in support of the petition. The assessee explained the delay in her petition for condonation as under: - Printed from counselvise.com ITANo.1769/Del/2025 5 Printed from counselvise.com ITANo.1769/Del/2025 6 Printed from counselvise.com ITANo.1769/Del/2025 7 Printed from counselvise.com ITANo.1769/Del/2025 8 2.1 In view of the above explanation furnished by the Assessee, we find that there is sufficient cause and reason for the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Thus, the delay of 142 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted. 3. Coming to the merits in the appeal of the assessee Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limne holding it to be barred by limitation. Ld. Counsel submitted that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed without providing an opportunity to the assessee to explain the delay, if any, in filing the appeal. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that in this case the AO never served any notice of demand u/s 156 of the Act making the assessment order as barred by limitation. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing opportunity to the assessee to make her submissions. 3. Ld. DR has no serious objection. 4. Considering the rival submissions, perusing the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we feel it appropriate to restore this appeal to the file of the Printed from counselvise.com ITANo.1769/Del/2025 9 Ld. CIT(A) to provide an opportunity to the assessee to explain the delay, if any and dispose of the appeal in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 5. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 26.09.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (M BALAGANESH) (C.N. PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 26.09.2025 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S. Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "