KRIPAL SINGH,HAPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, HAPUR

ITA 5947/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Kripal Singh against an ex parte order passed by the ld CIT(A), which was based on an assessment under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2012-13. The appeal was initially dismissed due to non-appearance, as the notice was not properly communicated to the assessee but was instead sent to his Chartered Accountant. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) found that the issue was decided ex parte without proper adjudication on merits, leading to the decision to restore the appeal for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 774503 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 21-12-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"Page | 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 5947/Del/2024 (Assessment Year: 2012-13 ) Kripal Singh, 167, Chamad Mohalla Sirodhan, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh-245101 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(5) Hapur, Uttar Pradesh- 245101 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: JVMPS9251K Assessee by : None Revenue by: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 01/09/2025 Date of pronouncement 03/09/2025 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA No.5947/AGR/2024 for AY 2012-13, arises out of the ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] in Appeal No.CIT(A),Ghaziabad/11925/2019-20 dated 30.10.2023 against the order of assessment passed u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 27.12.2019 by the Income Tax Officer ward 2(3)(4) at Hapur (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. At the outset, we find that there is a delay in filing of appeal by the Assessee before us by 354 days. Considering the reasons adduced in the Condonation Petition, we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal of the Assessee for adjudication. Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 3. The main grievance of the Assessee is that the notice of hearing was served by the Learned CITA on the email of the Assessee's Chartered Accountant who had not intimated the same to the Assessee, which eventually led to dismissal of the appeal by passing an ex parte order by the Learned CITA. 4. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We have heard the Learned DR and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the order of the ld CITA, we find that the ld CITA had decided the issue ex parte without adjudicating the issue on merits giving its independent finding. Hence, in the interest of justice and fairplay, we deem it fit and appropriate to restore this appeal to file of ld CITA for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also given liberty to raise fresh grounds , if any, and file fresh evidences, if any, in support of his contentions. The assessee is directed to cooperate with ld CITA for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 03/09/2025. Sd/- Sd/- /- (SUDHIR KUMAR) (M. BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 03/09/2025 f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant Printed from counselvise.com Page | 3 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "