SHRI RAJINDER SINGH, KATHUA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD1(4), KATHUA

ITA 248/ASR/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0243 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 12-06-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 27-08-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAKTI SINGH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 147; 144; 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.248/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sh. Rajinder Singh, Shiva Nagar Kathua [PAN:DHMPS0521L] (Appellant) Vs. ITO, Ward (1)(4), Kathua. (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. Shakti Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.06.2024 Date of Pronouncement 12.08.2024 ORDER Per: Udayan Das Gupta, JM This appeal is presented by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT (A) NFAC, order dated 26/09/2022, passed u/s 250 of the Act 61, confirming the assessment order u/s 144 of the Act 1961 dated 14.12.2019 for A.Y. 2012-13. 2. Condonation of Delay of 276 days. It is pointed out by the registry that this appeal has been filed by the assessee belated by 276 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay along with a sworn affidavit of the chartered accountant of the assessee Mr. Mohit Khanna ( FCA ) of Jammu , where I.T.A. No.248/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 2 the FCA has admitted that the filing of this appeal was handed over to him by his client , but unfortunately his wife Sakshi Khanna , fell seriously ill and she had to be put under medical treatment in a hospital in Chandigarh and the Ld. counsel had to leave Jammu and stay with his spouse at Chandigarh , because the disease was of a fatal nature . The counsel has also filed copies of medical papers from the hospital (PGIMER), Chandigarh. It is also seen that the assessee has deposited the tribunal fees of Rs. 10,000/- in bank earlier which proves he had the intention of filing the appeal but was prevented by medical emergencies of his counsel. 2.1 The Ld. DR did not object to the contents of the affidavit. As such considering the medical reasons put forth by Mr Mohit Khanna (FCA) in his sworn affidavit, we condone the delay in filing this appeal, and the same is admitted to be heard on merits. 3. The grounds of the appeal are as under: “1 That the order under appeal is against the law and facts of the case. 2 That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has not been justified in confirming the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. 3 That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has also erred in law in not deciding the appeal of the appellant on merits. 4 That the appellant could not operate the income Tax Portal as the appellant was not well. I.T.A. No.248/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 3 5 It is prayed that the Hon’ble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to allow the appellant to amend or file additional/alternate grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.” 4. The brief facts are that the assessee has deposited cash amounting to Rs. 14,10,434/- during FY 2011-12 (Asst year 2012-13) in his bank account at Jammu Kashmir Bank, and in absence of any explanations or submissions from the assessee, in course of proceedings u/s 147 of the Act 61, regarding the source of deposit, the said amount was added back to the total income of the assessee. In course of first appeal proceedings there was no representation from the assessee and no submissions were also filed, except in the SOF of Form 35, it was stated that the assessee was engaged in business of paddy and regular return has been filed and the deposits are out of business sale proceeds. 4.1 However, it is seen from the appellate order, that notice of hearing from office of the first appellate authority issued vide email id provided in ITBA portal, on six different dates, and successfully delivered, has not been complied by the assessee, and in absence of any compliance, submissions or representations from the assessee, on record, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. 5. Now the assessee is before the tribunal, on the grounds contained in the appeal memorandum and the main issue raised by the assessee is that proper and I.T.A. No.248/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 4 reasonable opportunity has not been allowed in appellate proceedings and the appeal has not been decided on merits by the first appellate authority. There was no appearance by the assessee or his AR, on the date of hearing. It is seen from order sheet noting that the Ld. AR of the assessee filed and sought adjournment on 1 st April, 2024, which was granted, thereafter, again adjournment was sought by the Ld. AR on 25 th April, 2024, vide written request, which was also granted. 5.1 Thereafter, there is neither any appearance nor any request for adjournment on this date of hearing. 5.2 So it is seen that it is a case that the assessee and his Ld. AR both are aware of the dates of hearing and has been seeking adjournments, through email, without representation, and on the date of hearing this day there is no representation. 5.3 So we proceed to dispose off the case, after hearing the Ld. DR. We find from the appellate order that the Ld. CIT (A) has not decided the grounds of appeal contained in Form 35, on merits of the case, as is the legal mandate of section 250(6) of the Act 61. 6. As such, in the interest of justice we remand the matter to the files of the Ld. CIT (A) for disposing off the appeal on the grounds contained in Form 35 on merits and we also direct the assessee to file all submissions and arguments in I.T.A. No.248/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 5 support of the grounds of appeal, and to fully cooperate with the appellate authority for disposal of the case on merits. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No. 248/Asr/2023 is allowed for the statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 12.08.2024 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. M. L. Meena) (UDAYAN DAS GUPTA) Accountant Member Judicial 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 I.T.A. No.248/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 6