GEETA VIJAYWARGIYA,INDORE V. ITO WD, TONK, TONK

ITA 1245/JPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Geeta Vijaywargiya, who appealed against the order of the Learned CIT(A), NFAC, which dismissed her earlier appeal and referred the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment concerning the assessment year 2014-15. The primary issue in the original assessment was the appellant's failure to furnish vital information regarding transactions with M/s M N Enterprises. The CIT(A) found that the Assessing Officer had potentially overlooked relevant documents and emphasized the need for a re-examination of all aspects of the case, including the nature and source of the transactions. However, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's failure to file within the prescribed period, lacking any application or sufficient cause for the delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 787529 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 06-09-2025
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. Greenworld Corporation, Civil Appeal No. 3312 of 2009
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: JAIDEEP JAIN; THROUGH V.C
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Period of limitation; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A-Bench” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihyla-@ITA No.1245/JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2014-15 Geeta Vijaywargiya 19/3, Royal Park 3, New Palasia Road, Palasia Janjir Wala Chouraha, Indore, Madhya Pradesh. cuke Vs. The ITO, Ward, Tonk. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkjla-@PAN/GIR No. AARPV8726H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assessee by : Shri Jaideep Jain, Adv. (through V.C.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: None lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 17/11/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 17/11/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER . On 05.08.2025, the assessee filed an appeal, feeling aggrieved by order dated 21.10.2025, passed by Learned CIT(A), NFAC, whereby the appeal filed by the assessee challenging assessment order dated 18.05.2023, relating to the assessment year 2014-15, came to be dismissed and while exercising powers u/s 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act (in short “the Act”), the matter stands referred back to the Assessing Officer for afresh assessment. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 1245/JPR/2025 Geeta Vijaywargiya, Indore. Learned CIT(A) so referred the matter to the Assessing Officer keeping in view that during assessment proceedings, the assessee could not furnish vital information relating to transaction with M/s M N Enterprises, and while appreciating the contention on behalf of the appellant raised there that the Assessing Officer had overlooked relevant documents submitted during assessment proceedings. Learned CIT(A) was of the view that all the aspects raised by the assessing in the appeal required re-examination, including as to the nature and source of the transactions made by the appellant and that the assessee was entitled to an opportunity, in the interest of principles of natural justice, as per decision in CIT vs. Greenworld Corporation, Civil Appeal No. 3312 of 2009, wherein importance of reasonable opportunity was emphasized by Hon’ble Apex Court. Condonation of delay 2. It may be mentioned here that the Registry raised a deficiency note that the appeal is barred by limitation, having been filed after a delay of 249 days. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 1245/JPR/2025 Geeta Vijaywargiya, Indore. 3. Despite the above said deficiency note, the assessee has not submitted any application seeking condonation of delay. Column no. 11 of Form 36, requires that in case there is delay in filing of the appeal, an application seeking condonation of delay is to be attached to the memorandum of appeal. 4. Be that as it may, it was for the assessee-appellant to satisfy that there was sufficient cause in non-filing of the appeal within prescribed period of limitation. Only of such satisfaction, Appellate Tribunal would admit the appeal while condoning delay in filing of the appeal. Since no such application has been filed or prayer has been made seeking condonation of delay and no sufficient cause has been alleged, what to say of its proof, it can safely be said that there was no sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal withint the prescribed period of limitation. Consequently, the appeal deserves to be dismissed being barred by limitation. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 1245/JPR/2025 Geeta Vijaywargiya, Indore. Result 5. In view of the above discussion, this appeal is hereby dismissed being barred by limitation. File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 17/11/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼xxu xks;y½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (GAGAN GOYAL) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 17/11/2025 *Santosh vkns'k dh izfrfyfivxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- Geeta Vijaywargiya, Indore. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward, Tonk. 3. vk;djvk;qDr@ Theld CIT 4. vk;djvk;qDr@CIT(A) 5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;djvihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 6. xkMZQkbZy@ Guard File ITA No. 1245/JPR/2025) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asstt. Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "