MAALDDIN,HARYANA V. NFAC, NEW DELHI

ITA 1619/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Maalddin, the appellant, who contested an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning an assessment for the year 2017-18. The appellant faced a delay of 197 days in filing the appeal due to health issues, specifically undergoing angioplasty. The Tribunal condoned the delay, acknowledging the appellant's health problems as a valid reason for the late filing. The primary contention was the dismissal of the appellant's earlier appeal by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) due to non-appearance, attributed to the appellant's illness. The Tribunal found merit in restoring the case to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, emphasizing justice and fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 473078 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 23-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: APPELLANT ASSESSEE; AMIT SHUKLA
• Assessee Lawyers: I. P. BANSAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 142(1); 143(2)

Judgement Text

" Page1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1619/Del/2024 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2017-18) Maalddin House No.268, Tapkan (96), Tapkan, Mewat-122107 Haryana-122107 PAN:BPBPM8995K Vs. NFAC, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri I.P. Bansal, Adv. Shri Vivek Bansal, Adv. and Sh. Vishal Chechi, Adv. Respondent by Shri Amit Shukla, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 23/10/2024 Date of Pronouncement 23/10/2024 O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR,JM: The application for Condonation of delay of 197 days in filing appeal and the appeal of the Assessee are against order dated 09/08/2023 of the, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi, passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] arising out of Assessment Order dated 17/01/2022 of the Assessing Officer(hereinafter referred as Ld. A.O.) for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2ITA No.1619/Del/2024 Maalddin vs. NFAC Page2 2. The appellant has submitted that he has suffering from heart trouble and was in hospital for undergoing angioplasty. Copies of treatment record have been filed. Explanation for Condonation of delay in filing appeal does not smack of malafides as nothing has been gained by the appellant/assessee. Therefore, the application for Condonation of delay in delay of 197 days in filing appeal is condoned. 3. Brief facts of case are that appellant/assessee filed return of income of Rs.4,85,130/- for Assessment Year 2017-18 on 04/01/2018. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS. Notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 10/08/2018 by the ITO, Ward-1(1), Gurugram. The case was transferred from ITO, Ward-1, Gurugram, to ITO Ward No.2(4), Gurugram. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act were issued to assessee and 21/02/2019 or 26/08/2019 but no response was received. Ld. AO completed assessment proceeding vide order dated 17/01/2022. 4. The appellant/assessee preferred application for Condonation of delay of 33 days in filing appeal and appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Ld(CIT(A) allowed application for Condonation of delay of 33 days in filing appeal and dismissed the appeal vide order dated 09/08/2023. 5. Learned Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that there is delay of 197 days in filing appeal due to illness. Because of illness the appellant could not appear before 3ITA No.1619/Del/2024 Maalddin vs. NFAC Page3 the Ld. CIT(A). Learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex- parte. So, the matter may be restored to file of Learned CIT(A) for fresh decision. 6. Learned Departmental Representative for Revenue submitted that appellant despite notices did not appear before Ld. CIT)A). 7. From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contentions it is crystal clear that appellant due to illness failed to appear in assessment proceedings and appellate proceedings before Ld AO and Ld.CIT(A). In view of above material facts in interest of justice, it is expedient to restore the matter to the file of Ld. AO for fresh decision in accordance with Law. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 23rd October, 2024. Sd/- sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated:23/10/2024 DP/sps Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELH "