LATE SH. RAGHUVIR SINGH (THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIR MR. VIJAY KUMAR),DELHI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 43(2), DELHI

ITA 5627/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Mr. Vijay Kumar, the legal heir of the late Sh. Raghuvir Singh, against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi, which had dismissed the appellant's earlier appeal as barred by limitation. The original assessment order, which added Rs.31,22,475 to the income of the deceased, was passed on 23.12.2019 but was only discovered by the appellant in October 2022. The ITAT found that the delay in filing the appeal was due to the genuine reasons related to the health and subsequent death of the original assessee, and thus, the delay was condoned.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 361232 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: VIBHU GUPTA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"P a g e | 1 ITA No.5627/Del/2024 Late Sh. Raghuvir Singh (through his legal heir Mr. Vijay Kumar) THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5627/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2017-18) Late Sh. Raghuvir Singh (through his legal heir Mr. Vijay Kumar) RZ-16, Prem Nagar, Phase-II, Nazafgarh, Opp. Police Station Delhi – 110043 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 43(2) Civic Centre, Minto Road, Minto Road, New Delhi, New Delhi – 110002 \u0001थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AYDPS7567F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri Vibhu Gupta, Adv, Respondent by : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 21.05.2025 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi, dated 23.10.2024 whereby and whereunder the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. AO challenging the addition of Rs.31,22,475/- stood dismissed. In fact, the appeal preferred before the Ld. CIT(A) was barred by limitation. The assessment order was passed on 23.12.2019 which was claimed to have been served upon the appellant on 12.10.2020 the P a g e | 2 ITA No.5627/Del/2024 Late Sh. Raghuvir Singh (through his legal heir Mr. Vijay Kumar) appellant being the legal heir of the original assessee late Shri Raghuvir Singh. According to the Ld. CIT(A) sufficient cause as envisaged in Section 5 of the limitation Act has not able to be shown in preferring the appeal late and therefore, relying upon number of judgments passed by the different judicial forum the appeal preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed holding the same as barred by limitation. 2. Before us the assessee’s son has filed an affidavit stating that the order of assessment under Section 144 of the Act was passed by the Ld. AO on 23.12.2019 when the assessee’s father aged about more than 80 years was suffering from age related illness and subsequently left for his heavenly abroad on 27.03.2020 which was made known to the Revenue. Only in October 2022 when the son of the deceased assessee came to know about the assessment order passed in the name of his father immediately thereafter on 29.10.2020 the appeal was filed before the First Appellate Authority. Since, the assessment order dated 23.12.2019 passed in the name of late Shri Raghuvir Singh came to the knowledge of the legal heir i.e. son of the assessee only on 12.10.2020 the said date was therefore, mentioned as the date of service of the order in Form 35 filed before the Ld. CIT(A). The present appeal before us has been filed by a medical practitioner and is not well versed with the income tax laws and completely relied upon the advice given by the consultant the appeal has been filed before the Ld. CIT(A). In that view of the matter, there is no laches on the part of the son of the original assessee in preferring the appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority and sufficient cause in preferring the said appeal has duly been narrated which ought to have been considered by the Ld. CIT(A) in its proper perspective while dealing with the appeal filed before him as was the crux of the submission made P a g e | 3 ITA No.5627/Del/2024 Late Sh. Raghuvir Singh (through his legal heir Mr. Vijay Kumar) by the Ld. AR before us. Such contention made by the Ld. AR has not been able to be controverted by the Ld. DR. 3. Having heard the Ld. Counsels appearing for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the matter particularly explanation rendered by the assessee in preferring the appeal late before the First Appellate Authority which in my considered opinion seems to be genuine; this appeal therefore, ought to have been admitted by the Ld. CIT(A). The delay in fact is, thus, condoned by this bench and this bench further deems it fit and proper to grant a further opportunity to the assessee to get the appeal considered afresh on merit by the Ld. CIT(A) and thus, the appeal is dispose of by remitting the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for consideration of the same afresh upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the appeal. The appeal preferred by the assessee is thus, allowed for statistical purposes. 4. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 21.05.2025 Sd/- (Madhumita Roy) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 21.05.2025 PS: Rohit P a g e | 4 ITA No.5627/Del/2024 Late Sh. Raghuvir Singh (through his legal heir Mr. Vijay Kumar) Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI "