DHARMENDRA CHOUDHARY,GUNA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GUNA

ITA 9/AGR/2026

AI Insights

The case involves Dharmendra Choudhary, the proprietor of Choudhary Sigma Group, who appealed against the order of the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Central Processing Center, Bengaluru, concerning an intimation under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2020-21. The intimation included a disallowance of Rs. 6,79,242 for cold storage rent expenses on the grounds of non-deduction of tax at source. The primary issue was the significant delay in filing the appeal with the CIT(A), which was attributed to the non-receipt of the initial intimation order by the assessee. The Tribunal considered the nature of the assessee's business and the circumstances leading to the delay, ultimately deciding to condone the delay to ensure substantial justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 847259 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Agra
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 05-01-2026
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SUBHASH CHAND JAIN
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA (SMC) BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 9/Agr/2026 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Dharmendra Choudhary Shop No 13 Prop. Choudhary Sigma Group, Infornt of Dhaniya Mandi Galla Mandi, Nanakhedi, Guna, Shivpuri-473001 Vs. ITO Guna PAN : AFPPC3244L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Subhash Chand Jain, CA Department by Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 17.03.2026 Date of pronouncement 24.03.2026 ORDER This is an appeal of the assessee arising out of the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as ld.CIT(A)] in appeal No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1082928106(1) dated 24.11.2025 of the A.Y. 2020-21 against the order passed by ITO, Central Processing Center, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as the ld. A.O) u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). 2. Though the assessee has raised several grounds, the preliminary ground raised by the assessee is challenging the action of ld CIT(A) in not condoning the delay in filing of appeal before it. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.9/Agr/2026 2 | P a g e 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. It is not in dispute that assessee had preferred an appeal against the intimation u/s. 143 (1) of the Act before the ld CIT(A) with a delay of 1230 days. But we find that assessee had pleaded that the CPC order was not served on him. The assessee pleaded that he is a proprietor of Choudhary Sigma Group which is engaged in the business of grains and kirana goods and had filed his return of income for A.Y. 2024-25 on 04.01.2021 declaring business income. The books of accounts of the assessee were duly audited u/s. 44 AB of the Act and tax audit report in Form 3CD was duly filed on 23.12.2020 by the assessee. The said return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act by the ld CPC, Bengaluru on 03.11.2021 wherein disallowance of Rs. 6,79,242/- being cold storage rent expense was made on the ground that the assessee had not deducted tax at source. The assessee pleaded before the ld CIT(A) that the intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act was not served on the assessee and that the fact of such order was made known to the assessee only after getting a call from the Income Tax Department with regard to the payment of outstanding demand. Thereafter the assessee obtained a copy and filed appeal before the ld CIT(A) with a delay of 1230 days. In our considered view, considering the inordinate period of delay and also considering the nature of business in which assessee is involved, we are inclined to direct ld CIT(A) to condone the delay in the interest of substantial justice subject to payment of cost of Rs. 10,000/- to Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gwalior Bench Legal Aid Authority within one month from the date of receipt of this order of the tribunal. We make it Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.9/Agr/2026 3 | P a g e very clear that the ld CIT(A) shall condone the delay after ensuring whether the cost imposed in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- is paid by the assessee and thereafter admit the appeal and adjudicate the issue in dispute de novo in accordance with law. With these observations, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24.03.2026 -Sd/- -Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (M BALAGANESH) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 24.03.2026 *Aamir Siddiqui, PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra Printed from counselvise.com "