NIDHI JAIN,GALI NO., SBI COLONY, FAFADIH,RAIPUR V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR (C.G.), CIVIL LINES, RAIPUR (C.G.)

ITA 659/RPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Nidhi Jain, the proprietor of M/s Pawan Udyog, who filed an income tax return for the Assessment Year 2013-14 declaring a total income of Rs.9,76,890. The Income Tax Department reopened her case based on credible information that she had taken unexplained accommodation entries. During reassessment proceedings under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the assessee failed to comply with multiple notices, leading to a best judgment assessment and an addition of Rs. 7,692,594 as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a significant delay in filing. The ITAT, emphasizing the principles of natural justice, remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination of the delay and subsequent merits if the delay is condoned.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 787008 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 30-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAM TIWARI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Reassessment proceedings; Principle of natural justice; Accommodation entries
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर Ɋायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR Įी पाथ[ सारथी चौधरȣ, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी अŜण खोड़िपया, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ । BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No: 659/RPR/2025 (िनधाŊरण वषŊ Assessment Year: 2013-14) Nidhi Jain, Gali No. 4, SBI Colony, Fafadih, Gudhiyari, Raipur-492001, C.G. v s ACIT, Circle-1(1), Civil Lines, Raipur-492001, C.G. PAN: AFBPJ2212D (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) . . (ŮȑथŎ / Respondent) िनधाŊįरती की ओर से / Assessee by : None (adjournment application) राजˢ की ओर से / Revenue by : Shri Ram Tiwari, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 18.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, AM: The captioned appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi, [in short “Ld. CIT(A)”] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), dated 31.07.2025 for the Assessment Year 2013-14, which in turn arises from the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, dated 06.05.2023 passed by Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department (in short “Ld. AO”). Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 659/RPR/2025 Nidhi Jain Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is proprietor of M/s Pawan Udyog has filed her ITR for AY 2013-14 declaring total income at Rs.9,76,890/-. Further, the case of assessee was reopened on the basis of credible information received by the department that the assessee has taken unexplained accommodation entries during the year under consideration. The assessee was subjected to reassessment proceedings u/s 147, however, during the entire proceedings when the assessee was issued with notices u/s 148, 144B, 142(1), letter, SCN u/s 144 and additional SCN, chooses not to comply accordingly, Ld. AO has completed the assessment on best judgment assessment u/s 144 of the Act after considering the information available on record. In conclusion, an addition of Rs. 7692594/- was made u/s 69A of the Act as unexplained money in the hands of assessee. 3. Being aggrieved, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) but remain unsuccessful as the appeal of assessee has been dismissed on account of delay in filing of the appeal for 436 days. 4. In order to assail the aforesaid decision of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us raising the grounds of appeal on merits / legality of the matter. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 659/RPR/2025 Nidhi Jain Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur 5. At the outset, it is noticed that the counsel of the assessee has requested for adjournment for the hearing, however, we are not inclined to allow such adjournment as the matter pertains to in limine dismissal by the Ld. CIT(A) on account of delay in filing of the appeal. It is observed that the assessee has furnished certain information about the sufficient cause to substantiate that the delay in filing the appeal was on account of unintentional circumstance, beyond the control of assessee and, therefore, the request for condonation of delay. Ld. CIT(A) had not considered the request of the assessee, even the assessee was not provided with further opportunity to substantiate the reasons for delay by way of further explanations corroborated with evidences. 6. In backdrop of such facts and circumstances, without deliberating on the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee which are not even touched upon by the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order, we find it appropriate to allow one last and final opportunity to the assessee on account of principle of natural justice by restoring the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo examination of the reasons for delay and, thereafter decide the matter on merits, if the assessee succeed in getting the condonation of delay in accordance with the provisions of section 249(3). Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 659/RPR/2025 Nidhi Jain Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur 7. Ld. CIT- DR representing the matter on behalf of the revenue, on this count has fairly agreed with the observation of the Bench on the issue and has agreed to the decision to remand the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to examine the aforesaid aspect. 8. In backdrop of aforesaid facts and circumstances, the impugned order has been set aside, and the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh, in terms of our aforesaid observation. 9. In result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observation. Order pronounced in the open court on 18/11/2025. Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) Sd/- (ARUN KHODPIA) Ɋाियक सद˟ / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद˟ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; िदनांक Dated 18/11/2025 Vaibhav Shrivastav, Stenographer आदेशकी Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/ The Appellant- Nidhi Jain 2. ŮȑथŎ/ The Respondent- ACIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur 3. The Pr. CIT, Raipur (C.G.) Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No. 659/RPR/2025 Nidhi Jain Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, (Senior Private Secretary) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर/ DR, ITAT, Raipur 5. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. // सȑािपत Ůित True copy // Printed from counselvise.com "