GURPREET SINGH KHURANA,JALANDHAR V. ITO WARD 1(5), JALANDHAR

ITA 539/ASR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Gurpreet Singh Khurana, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18. The appeal was initially delayed by 10 days due to logistical issues related to the appellant's residence in Canada and misunderstandings regarding the appeal fee. The tribunal found the reasons for the delay sufficient and reasonable, citing a recent Supreme Court decision that advocated for a justice-oriented and liberal approach in such matters. Consequently, the tribunal restored the case to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for a speaking order and proper consideration of the appellant's circumstances.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 716755 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 27-09-2024
• Other Referred Cases: VIDYA SHANKAR JAISWAL vs. ITO Ward-2, Ambikapur
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHARAN DASS
• Assessee Lawyers: J.S. BHASIN
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 539/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Gurpreet Singh Khurana, 52, Guru Gobind Singh Nagar, Jalandhar. [PAN: CPOPK0383P] (Appellant) Vs. ITO, Ward- 1(5), Jalandhar. (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. J. S. Bhasin, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 22 .08.2025 ORDER Per: Khettra Mohan Roy, AM: This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, dated 19.07.2024 for the A.Y. 2017-18 passed u/s 143(3). Condonation of delay; 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 10 days in filing the appeal before us. The ld. AR has submitted an application for condonation of delay which is reproduced as below: Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 539/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 2 That the appeal filed before the Hon'ble Bench in this case on 27.09.2024, against the order dated 19.07.2024 of NFAC/CIT(A), as pointed out by the registry, is late by 10 days, and the cause of delay is humbly explained below while seeking the delay to be condoned: “1. The appellant herein has been living in Canada for the past over two years and the orders/notices are received by him in his registered e-mail on portal. 2. That the impugned order of CIT(A) was also received by him and forwarded to his undersigned counsel at Jalandhar for further necessary' action. 3. That the order having been passed ex-parte, filing of 2*! appeal before the Hon'ble Bench was the only remedy and the appellant was advised accordingly. 4. That on instructions from appellant, appeal in Form No.36 was prepared and mailed to him with the request to send back hard copy of the same through courier, duly signed by the appellant for filing of appeal before the Tribunal. through courier, duly signed by the appellant for filing of appeal before the Tribunal. 5. That though it was a timely action to ensure filing of appeal within 60 days, but the courier sent by the appellant from Canada remained undelivered to the undersigned counsel and Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 539/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 3 therefore, it was sent again and in the process, the time lapsed resulting in filing of appeal belatedly by 27.09.2024 causing delay of 10 days. 6. That appreciating the reasonable cause, which is devoid of any malafide, the short delay of 10 days is prayed to condoned. Reliance in this behalf is placed on a recent decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated January 31, 2025 in the case of VIDYA SHANKAR JAISWAL vs. ITO Ward-2, Ambikapur passed in SLP Nos.26310-26311/2024, wherein their Lordships, reversing the orders of the ITAT Raipur Bench as also of the High Court, affirming the Tribunal's order declining to condone delay of 166 days, in para 4 and 5 of its order, held as follows: \"4. In our view, both the Tribunal and the High Court ought to have adopted justice oriented and liberal approach by condoning the delay of 166 days.\" 7. While holding so, the Tribunal was directed to decide the appeal in accordance with law. A copy of this order of Hon'ble Apex Court, for kind perusal of the Bench, is enclosed as Appendix A for kind . 8. It is also clarified that in this case, initially assessee paid appeal fee of Rs.500/- on 18.09.2024. However, the shortfall of Rs.9500/-, when pointed out, was paid on 12.12.2024. The delay occurred solely due to a bona fide and inadvertent mistake on the part of the assessee. The assessee had earlier filed an appeal in Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 539/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 4 Feb 2021 against an order under section 263 of the Act for AY 2016-17 in ITA No.8/ASR/2021, in which the prescribed fee paid was Rs.500/-. Under the mistaken belief that the same fee structure applied in the present case as well, only Rs.500/- was initially paid by assessee of his own. 9. It is respectfully submitted that the delay in making full payment of the appeal fee was neither intentional nor deliberate but occurred due to the genuine misunderstanding of the applicable fee provisions. 10. The Hon'ble Tribunal has inherent powers to condone such delay in the interest of justice. The assessee humbly prays that the delay in making the balance payment of the appeal fee may kindly be condoned, and the appeal may be treated as validly filed. 11. Also, Form No.36 is being filed afresh, since in the Form-36 earlier filed, place and date were not correctly filled, which is deeply regretted.” 3. There is a sufficient and reasonable cause for this delay. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and matter is taken up for adjudication. 4. It is manifest the appellate authority has passed a non-speaking order due to non-appearance of the appellant. The appellant has satisfactorily explained the reasons of his failure to attend and effectively participate. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 539/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 5 5. Accordingly, for the interest of natural justice and fair play, the matter is restored back to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding afresh. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 22.08.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Udayan Das Gupta) (KHETTRA MOHAN ROY) Judicial Member Accountant Member AKV Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By Order Printed from counselvise.com "