MUKESH SHARMA,JAGANNAT GANJ, BISWAN SITAPUR V. ITO, SITAPUR

ITA 406/LKW/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mukesh Sharma, the appellant, contesting an assessment order for the year 2015-16 issued by the ITO, Sitapur, which was upheld by the CIT(A) but later challenged in the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The primary issues revolved around the timeliness of the notice under section 148, the addition of unexplained business receipts, and the application of presumptive taxation under section 44AE. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on grounds of limitation without addressing the merits, leading to the current appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 779730 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 28-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT KUMAR
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Business income; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Presumptive income
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.406/LKW/2025 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Mukesh Sharma 30 Jagannat Ganj, Biswan Sitapur-261201. v. ITO Sitapur-261201. PAN:AWEPS9987J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Shri Amit Kumar, CIT(DR) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.406/LKW/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015-16 against impugned appellate order dated 06.03.2025 of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)”] for short]/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC). The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under: - “1. On the basis of facts AMD circumstances, the notice issued by the Ld. Authorities below u/s 148 is beyond the time limit specified u/s 149(1). The subsequent proceedings based on such notice are without jurisdiction AMD need to be annulled. 2. Ground 2. The Ld Authorities below have erred in law as well as on facts in making the addition of gross business receipts receipt from plying commercial vehicle amounting to Rs. 10,70,000 as unexplained money AMD levied the tax u/s 115BBE of the Income Tax Act even though the assessee duly declared income u/s 44AE at Rs. 90,000/- Ground 3. The Ld. Authorities below have erred in law as well as on facts in not considering the presumptive taxation scheme, 3 opted by the appellant i.e., special provisions of section 44AB for computing profits AMD gains of business of plying, hiring or leasing goods carriages. Ground 4. The Ld Authorities below have erred in law as well as on fact in not considering the Income declared by the assessee of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.406/LKW/2025 Page 2 of 4 Rs.4,03,179 in his ITR AMD treating the entire income as undisclosed. Thus the order passed is against the principle of natural Justice. Ground 5. The assessee reserves the right to add amend AMD DLALTE any of the shove grounds of appeal.” (A.1) In this case assessment order dated 30.03.2023 was passed u/s 147 read with section 144 read with section 144AB of Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short) whereby the assessee’s total income was determined at Rs.16,17,081/-. The assessment order was passed ex-parte qua the assessee. Vide impugned appellate order dated 06.03.2025, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed by the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) did not decide the assessee’s appeal on merits. The assessee’s appeal was dismissed by learned CIT(A) on grounds of limitation. The assessee had requested for condonation of delay however, the request of the assessee for condonation of delay was not considered favourably by the learned CIT(A) and the assessee’s appeal was dismissed treating the same as inadmissible on grounds of limitation. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. (B) At the time of hearing, there was no representation from the assessee’s side. In the absence of any representation from assessee’s side, we have heard learned Departmental Representative. The appeal of the assessee has been dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard. On perusal of records, it is found that the appellant had sufficient cause, within the meaning of section 249(3) of the Act, for not filing appeal in the office of learned CIT(A) within time frame mentioned in section 249(2) of the Act. Also, there is no material to establish mala-fide intention behind filing the appeal belatedly. In view of the aforesaid, the delay in filing of appeal in the office of the learned CIT(A) deserves to be condoned. It is also Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.406/LKW/2025 Page 3 of 4 found that the Assessing Officer had passed ex-parte assessment order without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. In response to a query from Bench, whether the issues in dispute regarding various additiona made in the assessment order be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo assessment orders, the learned Departmental Representative expressed no objection, and left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. In view of the foregoing, I am satisfied within the meaning of section 249(3), that the assessee had sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal in the office of the learned CIT(A) within prescribed time limit. Accordingly, it is held that this was a fit case for the learned CIT(A) to condone the delay in filing of the appeal in his office. Further, the assessment order has also been passed ex parte, without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. In view of the foregoing, the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) is set aside; and the issues in dispute regarding various additions made in the assessment order are restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to frame de novo assessment order on these specific issues of dispute, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 15/10/2025. Sd/- [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 15/10/2025 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.406/LKW/2025 Page 4 of 4 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard file By order //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "