POOJA GUPTA,GHAZIABAD V. ITO, WARD 5(2)(1), NOIDA, NOIDA

ITA 5036/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Pooja Gupta, the appellant, who filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) concerning the assessment year 2016-17. The primary contention was regarding the dismissal of her rectification application under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, which was deemed to be filed beyond the statutory time limit. The CIT(A) and the Tribunal both noted that the rectification application was submitted significantly late, and the appeal to the CIT(A) was also filed after a considerable delay, for which no sufficient reason was provided. The Tribunal, after considering the arguments and the procedural history, decided to dismiss the appeal, agreeing with the lower authorities' decisions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471805 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARPREET KAUR HANSRA
• Section: 143(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘F’’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5036/Del/2024 Asstt. Year : 2016-17 POOJA GUPTA, VS. ITO, WARD 52(1), CH. 206-207, ANSAL SATYAM, NOIDA RDC, RAJ NAGAR, GHAZIABAD-201002 (PAN: AXAPG5555F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 24.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement 24.02.2025 ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT : This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 27.8.2024 passed by the NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2016-17 on the following grounds:- 1. Because, order of Ld. Addl. /JCIT (A) is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Because, the Ld. Addl. /JCIT inherently wrong in dismissing the appeal of the ground of delay in filing the rectification application u/s. 154 of the Act without appreciating that the appellant 2 | P a g e received intimation order only 31.01.2023 thus, rectification application filed on 6.2.2023 was well within the time. 3. Because, ld. Addl/JCIT misdirected himself in holding that appeal was filed beyond limitation overlooking the fact that order u/s. 154 r.w.s. 143(1) was admittedly passed on 25.8.2023 as is duly mentioned on Form 35 as well. Thus, appeal field on 18.9.2023 was well within the limitation. 4. Because, without prejudice the above, even for academic sake, would there had been any delay the same is duly condoned as assessee duly demonstrated supported with the affidavit that intimation u/s. 143(1) was received only on 31.01.2023. 5. Because the Addl. /JCIT failed to consider the fact that intimation u/s. 143(1) was erroneous where by CPC taken Gross receipt of Rs. 8,15,642/- as the taxable income against the income of Rs. 2,08,504/- declared u/s. 44 AD of the Act, thus there was an apparent mistake in the order which is rectifiable u/s. 154 of the Act. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee, hence, we are proceeding the appeal exparte qua the assessee. Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld. First Appellate Authority. 3. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the records. Upon careful consideration, we find that as per order u/s. 154 of the Act, the order u/s. 143(1) of the Act was passed on 25.4.2017 and the same was served to the assessee on 28.4.2017 on her registered email, however, the assessee made application for rectification before the AO on 06.02.2023, hence, Ld. CIT(A) held that since the said application was submitted after the limitation date of rectification, hence, the ground on this account was rightly dismissed, which does not need any interference, therefore, we uphold the action of the Ld. CIT(A). 3 | P a g e 3.1 We further note that in this case there was a delay of 6 years in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), and the notice in this regard was issued to the assessee on 31.7.2024 to submit the reason for delay and justification for submitting wrong particulars in Form 35 but no sufficient reason submitted by the assessee, hence, Ld. CIT(A) observed that there is a considerable delay in filing the appeal, and accordingly, dismissed the appeal of the assessee on this account, which also does not need any interference on our part, hence, we affirm the action of the Ld. CIT(A). 4. In the background of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we reject all the grounds raised by the assessee in the instant appeal. 5. In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is dismissed in the aforesaid manner. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 24.02.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT SRBhatnagar Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. DIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY By Order, Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Bench "