NIRMALA DEVI,SONIPAT V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SONIPAT

ITA 4840/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Nirmala Devi against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, which dismissed her appeal due to a delay of 176 days in filing. The original assessment order was passed ex-parte under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with certain additions made to the income of Nirmala Devi for the Assessment Year 2016-17. The Tribunal found that the delay in filing the appeal was due to the appellant not receiving the notice and order in a timely manner as her mobile was not linked to her PAN, and thus condoned the delay and remanded the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 788874 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 07-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH
• Assessee Lawyers: AKSHAT SHARMA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"1 ITA No. 4840/Del/2025 Nirmala Devi Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4840/Del/2025 (A.Y 2016-17) Nirmala Devi 212-A, Adarsh Nagar, Soinpat, Haryana PAN: AASPD0946J Vs Income Tax Officer Atlas Road, Sonipat, Haryana Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Akshat Sharma, Adv Revenue by Sh. Om Prakash, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 24/11/2025 Date of Pronouncement 26/11/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The above captioned 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), dated 10/06/2025 for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 29/12/2023 u/s 147 r.w. Section 144and Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which has been dismissed on 10/06/2025 on delay in latches vide order impugned. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 10/06/2025, Assessee preferred the present Appeal. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 4840/Del/2025 Nirmala Devi Vs. ITO 3. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) committed error in not condoning delay of 176 days though there was sufficient reason to condone the delay, the Ld. Counsel sought for condoning the delay and remand the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the Appeal afresh by allowing the present Appeal. 4. Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not appeared before the Lower Authorities, therefore, both the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the respective orders in accordance with law which requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the order of the A.O. as well as order of the Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not participated in any of the proceedings. The Appeal of the Assessee has been dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) on delay in latches as there was 176 days in filing the First Appeal. It was the case of the Assessee that the Assessee could not file the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) on time as the notice/s was not sent physically and order not received online as Assessee’s mobile was not linked to PAN. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 176 days in filing the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). As the assessment order is also passed Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 4840/Del/2025 Nirmala Devi Vs. ITO ex-parte, in the interest of justice, we restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de-novo assessment. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment order in accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail. 6. In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th November, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 26 .11.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "