MR. AMAN AGARWAL,RUDRAPUR V. ITO, RUDRAPUR

ITA 237/DDN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Aman Agarwal, the appellant, who contested an assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer, which significantly increased his declared income for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The initial appeal to the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay of 245 days, which the CIT(A) did not condone. The appellant argued that the delay was caused by the late receipt of the order from the A.O. and mismanagement by his previous tax consultant. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and the Supreme Court's directives on condoning delays for substantial justice, remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on its merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 714347 (ITAT-DEHRADUN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMAR PAL SINGH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Rectification of order
• Section: 147; 144; 154

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 237/DDN/2024 Aman Agarwal VS. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI [ DELHI BENCH : “DEHRADUN”/ NEW DELHI] BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 237/DDN/2024 (A.Y 2017-18) Mr.Aman Agarwal Plot No. B 06, Street No. 02, Near Shiv Mandir, Model Colony, Rudrapur, 263153, Uttarakhand PAN: AOPPA3091L Vs. Income Tax officer 2(1)(4)(, Rudrapur, Income Tax Office, Rudrapur- 263153, Uttarakhand Appellant Respondent Assessee by None Revenue by Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement 08/08/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 26/11/2024 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 23/03/2023 u/s 147 r.w. Section 144 of Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 1,01,70,730/- as against returned income of Rs. 3,23,730/- by making an addition of Rs. 98,47,000/- u/s 69A of the Act on account of cash Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 237/DDN/2024 Aman Agarwal VS. ITO deposits/credits. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 23/03/2023, the Assessee preferred the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 26/11/2024, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee on delay in latches. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal. 3. None appeared for the Assessee. Considering the issue involved in the present Appeal we deem it fit to decide the Appeal on hearing the Ld. Department's Representative and perused the material available on record. 4. The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that there was no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay of 245 days in filing the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the first appeal of the Assessee in delay in latches, thus, sought for dismissal of the present Appeal. 5. We have heard the Department's Representative and perused the material available on record. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 23/03/2023, the Assessee preferred Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 245 days. As per the Assessee, the cause of the delay was that ‘the order from A.O. had been received late on account of the previous Tax Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 237/DDN/2024 Aman Agarwal VS. ITO Consultant has not attend the mater in time. He had told to the party that he had replied it due to unawareness of procedure of Income Tax Department after order u/s 144 there is only appeal is to filed against the order to explain the Assessee view or if there is any rectification of mistake then application u/s 154 of the Income Tax is to be filed.’ However, the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay and dismissed the Appeal. 6. It is expected from the Assessee to file the Appeal on time, if the cause for delay is bona- fide and beyond the control of the Assessee, the same can be construed as sufficient cause. The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the Appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay. In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji& Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that the delay when supported by justifiable reasons, must make way for the cause of substantial justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 245 days in filing the first Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 237/DDN/2024 Aman Agarwal VS. ITO 7. In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 08th August, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 08.08.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "