EAGLE JEWELS PRIVATE LIMITED,KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8(2), DELHI, DELHI

ITA 1562/DEL/2025

AI Insights

Eagle Jewels Private Limited filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 22/08/2024, which had dismissed their first appeal regarding an assessment order for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessment had significantly increased the income from Rs. 49,41,830 to Rs. 14,99,41,830. The Tribunal noted a procedural error where the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without considering the merits, leading to the decision to remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775369 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 15-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUMAN MALIK
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJU KUMARI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"1 ITA NO. 1562/Del/2025 Eagle Jewels Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” Bench BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1562/DEL/2025 (A.Y 2017-18) Eagle Jewels Private Limited, Karol Bagh, New Delhi PAN No.AADCE8963A Vs. ACIT , Circle – 8 (2) Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee by Ms.SanjuKumari, Advocate Revenue by Ms.Suman Malik, CIT DR Date of Hearing 08/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 12/09/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 22/08/2024 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 135 days in filing the present appeal. An application for condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee contending that the assessee was under the impression that the appeal has been filed by their CA on time. However, on verification it was found that no appeal has been filed, therefore, the present appeal filed after changing adviser. Thus, there was delay of 135 days in filing the appeal, Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA NO. 1562/Del/2025 Eagle Jewels Vs. ACIT which is not deliberate or intentional, thus, sought for condoning the delay in filing the present appeal. 3. For the reason stated in the application for condonation of delay, the delay of 135 days in filing the present is hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that an assessment order came to be passed u/s. 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act (“The Act” for short) on 24.12.2019 by the computation of income of Rs.14,99,41,830/- against the returnedincome of Rs.49,41,830/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 24.12.2019, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and the CIT(A) vide order dated 22.08.2024, dismissed the 1stappeal, which is called in question in the present appeal. 5. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order of the CIT(A) has been passed in violation of natural justice, wherein the CIT(A) has not decided the appeal on merit, therefore, sought for remitting the issue involved in the appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A). 6. The Ld. Departmental Representative vehementlysubmitted that, even after ample opportunities,the assessee failedto represent before the CIT(A), therefore, CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal, which requires no interference in the hands of the Tribunal. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA NO. 1562/Del/2025 Eagle Jewels Vs. ACIT 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The Ld.CIT(A) while deciding the appeal exparte, not decided the grounds of appeal urged by the assessee and dismissed the appeal in limine. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we set aside the order of the CIT(A)and remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 8. In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 12 September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:-12.09.2025 NEHA, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "