Shri Kailash Singh , Bhopal V. The DCIT/ACIT 1 (1), Bhopal

ITA 413/Ind/2022

AI Insights

Kailash Singh appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), which itself arose from an assessment order passed by the DCIT/ACIT-1(1) Bhopal under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The primary grievances included the violation of natural justice due to the absence of a hearing opportunity and the erroneous addition of Rs. 72,47,812 as estimated profit. The Tribunal noted that the notices for the first appeal were sent to an incorrect email address, leading to the assessee's absence during the hearing, which resulted in an ex-parte order. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 130817 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 29-03-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 04-12-2022
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

Page 1 of 5 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, इंदौर ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) ITA No.413/Ind/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kailash Singh F.No.513, Bhagwan Parisar Hoshangabad Road, Misroad, Bhopal बनाम/ Vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1) Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) PAN: AHIPS 0796 G Assessee by Shri Ashish Goyal, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 30.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement 18.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 11.07.2022 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 17.12.2019 passed by learned DCIT/ACIT-1(1) Bhopal, [“Ld. AO”] u/s 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2017-18, the assessee has filed this appeal on following grounds: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the findings of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi are bad and opposed to facts, equity and law and are, therefore, unsustainable in law. Kailash Singh ITA No.413/Ind/2022 Assessment year 2017-18 Page 2 of 5 2. For that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi erred in violating the principles of natural justice by not providing opportunity of hearing to the assessee, the action of the Commissioner of Income Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi was wholly unreasonable, uncalled for and bad in law. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned A.O. as well as Commissioner of Income Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi erred in making addition of Rs. 72,47,812/- on account of estimation of profit, without appropriate reasons and justification, hence the same should be deleted. 4. Because the Commissioner of Income -Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi has passed expate order without appropriate opportunity of hearing. 5. The appellant craves leave to add/alter any of the grounds of the appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 2. Heard the learned Representatives of both sides at length and case- records perused. 3. The registry has informed that the present appeal is delayed by 19 days and therefore time-barred. Ld. AR submits that the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit on stamp. On perusal of the application/affidavit, we observe that the assessee has stated that his father was a senior citizen and seriously ill and there arose complications in his treatment; hence there occurred a small delay of 19 days in filing the appeal. Ld. AR very humbly submits that there is no deliberate lethargy, negligence or mala fide intention of assessee in making delay and the assessee does not stand to derive any benefit because of delay. He further submits that the sole reason of delay is the illness of assessee’s father. Ld. DR left the matter to the wisdom of Bench. We have considered the explanation of assessee and in absence of any contrary fact or material on record, the assessee is found to have a reasonable cause for delay in filing the present appeal. Placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387, we take a judicious view; condone delay and proceed with appeal. Kailash Singh ITA No.413/Ind/2022 Assessment year 2017-18 Page 3 of 5 4. Ld. AR carried us to Para No. 5 of the order of Ld. CIT(A) and ‘submitted that all notices of hearing of first-appeal were issued to the mail [e-mail] of assessee. But those notices could not come to the knowledge of assessee since the assessee is not accessing the impugned mail id. Ld. AR carried us to Form No. 36 (Appeal Memo) to demonstrate that the assessee has given a different mail id even in the said Form No. 36 for the very same reason. Ld. AR submits that since the notices of hearing of first appeal were not received, the assessee could not attend the hearing, which has led to the passing of ex-parte order by Ld. CIT(A). Ld. AR prays that the matter may be remanded to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for a proper adjudication on merit after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Ld. DR does not have any objection but prays to direct the assessee to represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments. In view of such pleadings by parties and also having regard to the principle of natural justice and fair play, we deem it fit and appropriate to remand this matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for a proper adjudication after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee, uninfluenced by his earlier decision. We order accordingly. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings fixed by Ld. CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments. Kailash Singh ITA No.413/Ind/2022 Assessment year 2017-18 Page 4 of 5 5. Resultantly, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced as per Rule 34 of I.T.A.T. Rules, 1963 on ....../....../2023. Order pronounced in the open court on 18/04/2023. Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore िदनांक /Dated :18.04.2023 Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Sr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore 1. Date of taking dictation 2. Date of typing & draft order placed before the Dictating Member 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. 4. Date on which the approved draft is placed before other Member Kailash Singh ITA No.413/Ind/2022 Assessment year 2017-18 Page 5 of 5 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 6. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 7. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 8. Date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 9. Date of dispatch of the Order