DEVINDER PAL SINGH HEERA,DELHI V. ACIT, CIRCLE 58(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 2793/DEL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Devinder Pal Singh Heera, a cancer patient and businessman in the jewelry trade, who faced scrutiny from the Income Tax Department due to substantial cash deposits during the demonetization period in India. The AO initially assessed the income for AY 2017-18, adding unexplained money and income to the assessee's taxable income. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision after the assessee failed to respond to multiple notices. The Tribunal, considering the assessee's health issues as a reasonable cause for non-representation, remanded the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment with proper opportunity for the assessee to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 313990 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR DHANESTA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause
• Section: 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2793/Del/2023 A.YR. : 2017-18 DEVINDER PAL SINGH HEERA, 7/7, GEETA COLONY, DELHI – 31 (PAN: ACHUPH4349D) VS. ACIT, CIRCLE 58(1), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by : NONE Respondent by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 06.05.2025 Date of pronouncement : 06.05.2025 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 7.6.2023 relating to assessment year 2017-18. 2. At the threshold, it is noted that the appeal is time barred by 58 days. In this regard, it is noted that delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal is due to illness of the assessee, who is a patient of cancer. Ld. DR could not controvert the aforesaid fact, Upon hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records, we find that reasonable cause has been attributed to the assessee in filing the belated appeal before the Tribunal, hence, in the interest of justice, 2 | P a g e the delay in filing the appeal before the appeal deserve to be condoned. We hold and direct accordingly. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual carrying on the business of wholesale and retain trading of gold, diamond and silver jewellery and other related articles. The assessee case was selected by AIMS module of ITBA due to huge cash deposits made during the demonetization. The assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs. 4,05,36,000/- in his bank account during the period of demonetization. The AO issued notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act to the assessee for filing the return of income for the AY 2017-18 but no response was filed by the assessee. The AO passed order u/s. 144 on 15.12.2019 and determined the appellants total assessed income at Rs. 4,51,93,560/-. The AO made the addition on account of unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act amounting to Rs. 3,99,11,000/- and on account of unexplained income of Rs. 52,82,560/-. 4. Upon assessee’s appeal, Ld. CIT(A) noted that several notices were given to the assessee, but no response was submitted by the assessee. Hence, he proceeded to confirm the order of the AO. Against this order, assessee is in appeal before us. 5. None appeared on behalf of the assesee, despite issue of notice of hearing, hence, we are proceeding exparte qua the assessee. 6. We have heard the Ld. DR, we find that assessee in ground no. 1 has submitted that assessee is a Stage-4 Cancer patient who underwent multiple surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy and thus no counsel was appointed to represent his case. In this view of the matter, we find that no representation before the AO and CIT(A) was attributed to the reasonable cause viz. medical conditions of the assessee, hence, in the interest of 3 | P a g e justice, we remit back the issues to the file of the AO with the directions to complete the assessment, afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7. In the result, the assessee’s appeal allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 06.05.2025. Sd/- (SUDHIR PAREEK) Sd/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SRBHATNAGAR Copy forwarded to:- 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT Assistant Registrar "