NEHA GUPTA,HARYANA V. ITO WARD-3(1), GURUGRAM, HARYANA

ITA 4822/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mrs. Neha Gupta, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, New Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The primary grievances included the unjustified additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under sections 144 and 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, concerning unsecured loans, cash deposits, and personal expenses. The CIT(A) had dismissed her appeal ex-parte due to her inability to appear or respond, attributed to her serious health issues, including major heart surgery. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) found merit in her condonation application, leading to the remand of the case for a fresh decision on its merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 787369 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 06-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRASKASH
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER ITA No.4822/Del/2025 [Assessment Year: 2011-12] Mrs. Neha Gupta, J-1339, Block-3, Palam Vihar, Gurugram Haryana-122001 Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), 2nd Floor, HSIIDC Building, Vanijya Kunj, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurugram, Haryana-122016 PAN-AHEPG3766G Assessee Revenue Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Om Praskash Sr. DR. Date of Hearing 19.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 19.11.2025 ORDER PER KRINWANT SAHAY, AM, Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 18.04.2024 of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, New Delhi, for Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. Order of the ld AO is bad in law and against the facts of the case. 2. The ld CIT (A) is totally unjustified in dismissing the appeal of the assessee as she could not appear or file the reply before the Ld CIT (A) due to her sickness. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.4822/Del/2025 3. The Ld CIT (A) is totally unjustified in up holding the order of ld AO which was passes u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act. 4. The Ld. A.O. is totally unjustified in making addition of Rs.69,95,000/- received as unsecured loans from friends & relatives. 5. The Ld. A.O. is totally unjustified making addition of Rs.4,25,000/- on a/c of cash deposited in her bank accounts out of personal savings. 6. The Ld. A.O. is totally unjustified making addition of Rs.2,40,000/- on a/c of personal expenses without verification of the same. 7. The Ld. A.O. is totally unjustified in initiating penalty proceedings U/s 271(1)(c), where the assessee has not concealed any income or filed inaccurate particulars of income. 3. The Registry has pointed out that there is delay of 415 days in filing of the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed application for condonation of delay. 3.1. In the condonation application, it has been pointed out that the assessee Mrs. Neha Gupta, was suffering from serious medical ailments since 2022. As a result, she had to go major heart surgery and she remained under prolonged treatment and restricted physical activity. 3.2. The ld. DR argued that the matter of delay in filing of the appeal may be considered on merit. 4. We find that since the assessee was sick for a longer period of time, therefore, the delay in filing of the appeal is hereby condoned. 5. During the proceedings before us, it has came to the notice of the Bench through Condonation application, due to prolonged illness of the Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.4822/Del/2025 assessee, she could not pursue the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), as a result, the ld. CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order in this case. Accordingly, the matter should be remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for passing the order on merit. 6. Per Contra, the ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 7. We have considered the findings given by the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) in their respective orders and we find that it is an ex-parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A) without taking on record the submissions of the assessee. In order to give natural justice to the assessee, we are inclined to remand this issue back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to give adequate opportunity to the assessee as required under law and pass order on merit. Thus, the appeal is remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on19th November, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [ANUBHAV SHARMA] [KRINWANT SAHAY] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 19.11.2025 f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.4822/Del/2025 3. PCIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "