CAREER POINT MONTESARI SIKSHA SAMITI,JAIPUR V. EXEMPTION WARD 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 515/JPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Career Point Montesari Siksha Samiti, the appellant, contesting an addition of Rs.23,64,175 made by the Income Tax Officer under the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The addition was initially contested but the appeal was dismissed by the ld.CIT(A) due to non-appearance of the assessee. The Tribunal found that the dismissal was without merit as it did not address the substantive issues raised. The Tribunal noted procedural lapses in communication and allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remitting the matter back to the ld.CIT(A) for a detailed examination and a reasoned decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 713166 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: R.S. POONIA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCHES “SMC”, JAIPUR BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.515/JPR/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Career Point Montesari Siksha Samiti C/o. CA R.S.Poonia, D-828, Siwad Area, Krishna Marg, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur-302015 Rajasthan PAN: AAAAC6169P Vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 1, Jaipur Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2018-19 is directed against the order dated 30.08.2024 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 27.02.2021 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act. 2. Registry has informed that the appeal before this Tribunal is time barred by 151 days. Application for condonation of delay has been placed on record. Main reason for the delay is that the notice(s) of hearing by ld.CIT(A) were not sent on the e-mail id mentioned in Form No.35 but were sent on the e-mail id of the previous consultant who did not communicate the Appellant by : Shri R.S. Poonia Respondent by : Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary Date of hearing : 01.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 29.07.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.515/JPR/2025 Career Point Montesari Siksha Samiti 2 information to the assessee resulting into the dismissal of the assessee’s appeal. 3. After hearing both the sides and going through the averments made in the condonation application by the assessee, I find that due to 'reasonable cause' assessee failed to file the appeals within the stipulated time limit. Having regard to the facts of the instant case, I condone the delay of 151 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeals for adjudication in light of judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). 4. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. In the instant appeal, the assessee has raised sole ground challenging the addition of Rs.23,64,175/- made by ld. Assessing Officer in the hands of assessee AOP for A.Y. 2018-19 as against the Nil income declared in the e-return filed on 13.07.2018. Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) raising the grounds in Form No.35 but then on account of non-appearance of the assessee on few dates of hearing ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal. However, ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with merits of the case and failed to pass a speaking order. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee requested for providing one more opportunity of hearing by remitting the issue to the file of ld.CIT(A). Ld. Departmental Representative on the other hand did not oppose this request. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.515/JPR/2025 Career Point Montesari Siksha Samiti 3 5. Considering these facts and the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee, I in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties remit the issue raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Assessee is at liberty to adduce all the required submissions/evidences before ld.CIT(A) to substantiate the case. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 29th day of July, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Jaipur; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 29th July, 2025. Satish Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.515/JPR/2025 Career Point Montesari Siksha Samiti 4 आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब\u0014च, Jaipur / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Jaipur 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Jaipur Printed from counselvise.com "