GAUTAM ,GURGAON V. ITO,WARD-2, REWARI

ITA 4551/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The appeals filed by the assessee, Gautam, were directed against the orders passed by the Ld CIT(A)NFAC, Delhi, which arose from the assessment orders issued by the ITO, Ward-1, Rewari under Section 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13. The primary issue involved was the cash deposit of Rs.68,38,677 in a joint savings bank account with Syndicate Bank, which the AO found to be income that had escaped assessment. The assessee did not appear before the AO, leading to an ex parte assessment, which was also confirmed by the First Appellate Authority. The assessee, due to being in custody during the relevant period, was unable to respond or appear, which led to the appeal being allowed and the case being remitted back for a de novo hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 34446 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR DHANESTA
• Assessee Lawyers: R.C. YADAV
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

"P a g e | 1 ITA Nos. 4551 & 4552/Del/2024 Gautam (AYs. 2011-12 & 2012-13) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.4551 & 4552/Del/2024 (A.Y. 2011-12 & 2012-13) Gautam C/o R.C. Yadav & Associates H-3, Unit-2- FF, Vatika INXT Floors, Sector-82, Gurugram Haryana-122004 Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2, Model Town, Near Lions Club, Rewari-123401 Haryana \u0001थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: BBOPK9646N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. R.C. Yadav, AR Respondent by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 19.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement 21.02.2025 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY: (JM): The instant appeal filed by the assessee are directed against the different order dated 27.12.2023 and 12.12.2023 passed by the Ld CIT(A)NFAC, Delhi, arising out of the assessment order passed by the ITO, Ward-1, Rewari both dated 19.11.2018 under Section 144/147 of P a g e | 2 ITA Nos. 4551 & 4552/Del/2024 Gautam (AYs. 2011-12 & 2012-13) the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13 respectively. 2. The delay of 214 days involving in filing this appeal an application for condonation of delay has been preferred by the assessee along with an affidavit where it has been stated that in order to file appeal all the requisite documents along with fee of Rs.30 thousand in cash were handed over to one Shri Yaspal who claimed to be a consultant of Income Tax and GST matters. Subsequently, on 12.07.2018 an FIR was registered against the assessee under Section 147/148/323/325/364 of IPC at the city police station and he was in custody from 10.09.2018 to 04.02.2019 and only in the month of july 2024 he could come to know from the departmental representative who came to his resident that almost Rs.1 crores to be paid to the Income Tax Department and thereafter the appeal has been preferred before us. Considering the documents in support to such statements made by the assessee as annexed to the application such submissions made by the assessee appears to be genuine and therefore, the delay is condoned. 3. Since both the matters relating to the assessee having identical issue these are heard analogously are being disposed of by way of common order for the sake of convenience for taking Assessment Year 2011-12 taken as a lead case wherein the issue involved is cash deposit of Rs.68,38,677/- in the saving bank account (joint) maintained with Syndicate Bank. The AO has came to the finding that there income has escaped assessment and notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2018 after recording reasons and obtaining approval from the P a g e | 3 ITA Nos. 4551 & 4552/Del/2024 Gautam (AYs. 2011-12 & 2012-13) PCIT, Rohtak. However, before the AO the assessee did not appear and the assessment was finalized exparte which was in turn confirmed by the First Appellate Authority that too by passing exparte order since despite several opportunities given to the assessee/appellant nobody represented before him. 4. At the time of hearing of the instant appeal the Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted before us that due to reason of being in custody from 10.09.2018 to 04.02.2019 the assessee was not been able to take any steps and the order was finalized. It was further submitted that the bank account lying with syndicate bank where cash deposit was made by the first holder who happens to be assessee’s father namely Shri Hansraj who was controlling the entire financial aspect and therefore, even otherwise, the addition was wrongly made in the hands of the assessee. However, we find from the records that as both the authorities below has decided the matter exparte as no assistance was rendered by the assessee for the reason as already discussed above, the assessee may be given a further opportunity of being heard to represent his case effectively and ventilate his grievance as indicated hereinabove. 5. Thus, having heard the ld. Counsels appearing for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice we dispose of this appeal by remitting the issue to the file of the Ld. AO to deal with the same denovo and to pass orders accordingly upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence on record or any other P a g e | 4 ITA Nos. 4551 & 4552/Del/2024 Gautam (AYs. 2011-12 & 2012-13) evidence which the assessee may chose to file at the time of hearing of the matter. 6. Taking into consideration the identical issue involved in both the appeals, thus, this order will govern in the other appeal i.e. ITA No.4552/Del/2024. 7. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 21.02.2025 Sd/- (M. Balaganesh) Sd/- (Madhumita Roy ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 21.02.2025 PS: Rohit Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI "