DURGA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 7(4), DELHI

ITA 2813/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Durga Apparels Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting decisions made by the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13. The primary issues revolved around the dismissal of the appellant's appeals by the CIT(A) on grounds of limitation and lack of adequate opportunity to present their case. For the year 2011-12, the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal due to delay without considering the merits, which the ITAT found reasonable cause for delay due to the medical illness of the director. For the year 2012-13, the CIT(A) was found to have not provided an adequate opportunity for the appellant to present their case. The ITAT, considering the interests of justice, decided to remit both issues back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471807 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR DHANESTA
• Assessee Lawyers: MUKUL GUPTA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 2813 & 2814/Del/2024 Asstt. Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Durga Apparels Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward 7(4), L-93, Chanakaya Place, C.R. Bldg., Part-II, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi – 59 (PAN: AABCD2546E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mukul Gupta, Adv. Respondent by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing 24.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 24.03.2025 ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP : These appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the separate orders dated 04.3.2020 & 04.08.2023 respectively passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2011-12 & 2012-13. 2. At the outset, with regard to assessment year 2011-12, Ld. AR for the assessee has submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in filing the appeal and dismissed the same on account of limitation and even without deciding the same on merits. Hence, he requested to condone the delay in dispute and remit back the 2 | P a g e issues to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Ld. DR has no objection to this proposition. 3. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. Upon careful consideration, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in dispute and even had not discussed the issues on merits and dismissed the appeal on account of limitation. In our considered opinion, reasonable cause viz. medical illness of the Director has been attributed for delay in filing the appeal, hence, the delay in dispute is hereby condoned before the Ld. CIT(A) and in view of the factual matrix and in the interest of justice, we remit back the issues in dispute to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, Assessee is also directed to fully cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) during the proceedings. Resultantly, the Assessee’s appeal for AY 2011-12 is allowed for statistical purposes. 4. As regards assessment year 2012-13 is concerned, Ld. AR has submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has not given adequate opportunity to canvass his case properly. Hence, it is requested that one opportunity may be granted to canvass the case before the Ld. CIT(A) properly. Ld. DR did not have any objection to this proposition. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. Upon careful consideration, in view of the factual matrix and in the interest of justice, we remit back the issues in dispute to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to fully cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) during the 3 | P a g e proceedings. Resultantly, the Assessee’s appeal for AY 2012-13 is also allowed for statistical purposes 6. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 24.03.2025. SD/- SD/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT SRBhatnagar Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. DIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY By Order, Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Bench "