ANIL BANSAL,DELHI V. ITO WARD 54(1) , DELHI

ITA 5411/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Anil Bansal, the appellant, who contested an ex-parte order passed by the Ld. AO under sections 147 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2014-15. Initially, the Ld. CIT(A) set aside this order but did not address the legal grounds raised, including the non-issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Act, nor did he provide an opportunity for the assessee to be heard, which contravened the principles of natural justice. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) found reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal and condoned the delay of 154 days. The ITAT directed the Ld. CIT(A) to re-evaluate the case, ensuring all legal grounds are considered and the assessee is given a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 792137 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 01-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKRAM SINGH SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: ABHISHEK JAIN; HIM BEFORE DECIDING
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"ITA No. 5411/DEL/2025 ANIL BANSAL VS ITO WARD 54(1), DELHI 1 | P a g e IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE-PRESIDENT & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5411/DEL/2025; Assessment Year: 2014-15 Anil Bansal 9/2910, Gurudwara Gali, Circular Road, Gandhi Nagar, New Delhi-31 Vs ITO Ward 54(1) Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAGPB3010R Assessee by : Shri Abhishek Jain, CA. Department/Revenue by : Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, SR DR Date of Hearing: 12.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 12.12.2025 ORDER Per Renu Jauhri, Accountant Member: An early hearing petition dated 27.11.2025 has been filed by the assessee in respect of the above captioned appeal. Vide application for hearing, the assessee has requested for urgent listing of the appeal and its early disposal. The petition was fixed for hearing. 2.1 At the threshold, it is noted that this appeal is time-barred by 154 days. Assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay explaining the reasons of delay. It has been submitted that due to the advice of the earlier CA, the assessee waited for issue of notice for fresh assessment from the Ld. AO. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 5411/DEL/2025 ANIL BANSAL VS ITO WARD 54(1), DELHI 2 | P a g e However, it was subsequently advised by the present tax consultant to file the appeal before the Tribunal as order of Ld. CIT(A) was erroneous. 2.2 After hearing both the parties, we are of the considered view that reasonable cause has been demonstrated for belated filing of appeal before the Tribunal. Hence, the delay of 154 days is, hereby, condoned. 3. At the outset, both the parties have consented for regular hearing of the appeal before us. 4.1 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is noted that the assessee had filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) against ex-parte order of the Ld. AO passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) dated 31.03.2022 wherein several legal and factual grounds were raised. Vide order dated 03.01.2025, the Ld. CIT(A) set-aside the ex-parte order of the Ld. AO with directions for making de novo assessment. However, Ld. CIT(A) did not adjudicate the legal grounds including that relating to non-issue of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. Moreover, no opportunity of being heard was provided to the assessee by him before deciding the appeal which is against the principles of natural justice. 4.2 In view of the above facts and circumstances, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) with directions to adjudicate all the grounds on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be vigilant and make requisite compliance before Ld. CIT(A). 5. Accordingly, the early hearing petition is rendered infructuous and the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 5411/DEL/2025 ANIL BANSAL VS ITO WARD 54(1), DELHI 3 | P a g e Order pronounced in the Open Court on 12 -12-2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Mahavir Singh) (Renu Jauhri) Vice- President Accountant Member Dated: 15.12.2025 Pooja Mittal Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "