DEEPAK SRIVASTAVA,DELHI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

ITA 1306/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Deepak Srivastava, an NRI doctor residing in the United States, who appealed against an assessment order for the AY 2012-13, which included an addition of Rs. 9 lakhs under section 69A of the Income Tax Act for unexplained investment in mutual funds. The initial appeal to the Ld.CIT(A) was dismissed due to a 9-day delay in filing, for which no condonation petition was submitted. The assessee, represented by Shri Sumeet Khanna and Ms. Simran, CA, later filed a delay condonation petition before the tribunal. The Ld. DR, Shri Sanjay Sharma, Sr. DR, did not object to the restoration of the appeal. The tribunal decided to restore the appeal to the Ld.CIT(A) to consider the delay condonation petition and the merits of the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 43614 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 05-12-2024
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 22-03-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: SUMEET KHANNA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 69A

Judgement Text

"I.T.A. No. 1306/Del/2024 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1306/Del/2024 िनधा\tरणवष\t/Assessment Year: 2012-13 DEEPAK SRIVASTAVA E-23, Saket, New Delhi. बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi. PAN No. BOPPS7436N अपीलाथ\u0014 Appellant \u0016\u0017यथ\u0014/Respondent िनधा\u0005\u0006रतीक\u000bओरसे /Assessee by Shri Sumeet Khanna, CA & Ms. Simran, CA राज\u0010वक\u000bओरसे /Revenue by Shri Sanjay Sharma, Sr. DR सुनवाईक\u000bतारीख/ Date of hearing: 05.12.2024 उ\u0016ोषणाक\u000bतारीख/Pronouncement on 06.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals)-9, Mumbai dated 23.01.2024 for the AY 2012-13. 2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that the appeal of the assessee is dismissed by the Ld.CIT(Appeals) as the Assessee did not file delay condonation petition for condoning the delay of 9 days in filing appeal before him. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that assessee is a Doctor, an NRI and residing in United States of America and occasionally was visiting India. I.T.A. No. 1306/Del/2024 2 Assessee filed appeal against the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on the addition of Rs.9 lakhs made u/s 69A of the Act on account of unexplained investment in mutual fund. On the advice of the Authorized Representative an appeal was filed before the Ld.CIT(A) with a delay of 9 days and the assessee inadvertently did not file petition for condonation before the Ld.CIT(A). Ld. Counsel submits that in the absence of petition for condonation of delay the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Ld. Counsel prayed that the appeal be restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) to consider the delay condonation petition which is now filed before the Tribunal. 3. Ld. DR has no serious objection in restoring the appeal to the file of the Ld.CIT(A). 4. Considering the rival submissions and perusing the order of the Ld.CIT(A), I find that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed for want of delay condonation petition for condoning the delay of 9 days. Assessee is a Doctor, an NRI residing in United States who visited India occasionally. He filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and inadvertently he did not file application for condonation of delay of 9 days, apparently he was not advised so by the Authorized Representative. The assessee field before me a petition for I.T.A. No. 1306/Del/2024 3 condonation of delay explaining the reasons for delay in filing the appeal and requested to condone the delay of 9 days since, the Ld.CIT(A) did not admit the appeal. I am of the view that this matter should go back to the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on the petition for condonation of delay and also on the merits. Thus, the appeal is restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) who shall decide the delay in filing the appeal by considering the delay condonation petition and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of being heard. Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 06/12/2024 Sd/- (C.N. PRASAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 06/12/2024 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S. Copy of order sent to- Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT/ CIT (A)/ ITAT (DR)/Guard file of ITAT. By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT: Delhi Benches-Delhi "