JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR V. PRADEEP MITTAL, JAIPUR

ITA 833/JPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (ODS), Central Circle-4, Jaipur against Pradeep Mittal, challenging the order passed by the Learned CIT(A) which allowed the assessee's appeal on the technical ground that the notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act was not legally sustainable. The department's appeal was dismissed due to being filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation and also because a notice under section 153C had already been issued to the assessee, making the appeal not maintainable.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 792904 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Suresh Bansal's case, DB Civil Writ Petition No.18363/2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALKA GAUTAM
• Assessee Lawyers: ANAND PAREEK
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Period of limitation
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

"vk;djvihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqjU;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B-Bench” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL, AM& SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihyla-@ITA No. 833/JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2011-12 Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (ODS), Central Circle-4, Jaipur. cuke Vs. Pradeep Mittal A-37, Janta Colony, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkjla-@PAN/GIR No.: ACFPM8950J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Shri Anand Pareek, Adv. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing :24/09/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 25/09/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER . Present appeal by the department came to be presented on 20.05.2025, while challenging order dated 03.01.2025, passed by Learned CIT(A), whereby the appeal filed by the assessee, was allowed on technical ground that notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was legally not sustainable, in view of decision by Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 833/JPR/2025 Pradeep Mittal, Jaipur. our own Hon’ble High Court in Suresh Bansal‘s case, DB Civil Writ Petition No.18363/2019. 2. Consequently, Learned CIT(A) set aside the assessment order dated 05.12.2018, whereby two additions of Rs. 4,43,30,000/-were made by the Assessing Officer, relating to the assessment year 2011-12. 3. It may be mentioned here that as per deficiency note raised by the Registry of this Appellate Tribunal, present appeal by the department, was barred by limitation, the same having been filed 50 days after prescribed period of limitation. 4. Along with the appeal, an application seeking condonation of delay was also filed by the department on the ground that the copy of the order, passed by Learned CIT(A) was received in the office of Learned PCIT on the same date i.e. 03.01.2025, but authorization for filing of the appeal was made by Learned PCIT on 21.03.2025, and on its receipt on 24.03.2025, the present appeal was filed on 20.05.2025. 5. Admittedly, copy of the impugned order was received in the office of Learned PCIT on 03.01.2025, but authorization for filing of the appeal came to be issued on 24.03.2025 i.e. beyond prescribed period of limitation. It Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 833/JPR/2025 Pradeep Mittal, Jaipur. was for the department to explain as to why so much time was taken for the purpose of authorization for filing of the appeal. Even if the authorization was received by the department from the office of PCIT, on 24.03.2025, it remains unexplained as to why the appeal was not filed immediately thereafter, and rather same was filed on 20.05.2025. Therefore, the appeal filed by the department is barred by limitation. 6. Even otherwise, Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted before the Bench copy of notice u/s 153 C of the Act, issued by the department to the assessee on 20.01.2025, relating to the same assessment year 2011-12 i.e. to which the impugned assessment order, and the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A), pertain. 7. As noticed above, present appeal came to be filed on 20.05.2025, but the department had already opted to issue notice u/s 153C of the Act, while giving effect to the decision of our own Hon’ble High Court in case of Suresh Bansal Case (supra). The moment the department issued said notice on 20.01.2025, neither Learned PCIT should have authorized filing of this appeal nor the Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 833/JPR/2025 Pradeep Mittal, Jaipur. department should have presented this appeal subsequently, i.e. on 20.05.2025. 8. In view of the above discussion, this appeal is hereby dismissed, being barred by limitation and also being not maintainable as on 20.5.2025, in view of issuance of notice u/s 153 C of the Act by the department, as on 20.01.2025 File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 25/09/2025. 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:- 25/09/2025 *Santosh vkns'k dh izfrfyfivxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- JCIT (OSD), Central Circle-4, Jaipur. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- Pradeep Mittal, Jaipur. 3. vk;djvk;qDr@ Theld CIT 4. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;djvihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 5. xkMZQkbZy@ Guard File ITA No. 833/JPR/2025) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;diathdkj@Asstt. Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "