RADHA KAMAL UPADHYAY,LUCKNOW V. ACIT-6, LUCKNOW

ITA 616/LKW/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Radha Kamal Upadhyaya, the appellant, contesting an appellate order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] dated 06/11/2023, which upheld an assessment order by the Assessing Officer (AO) dated 15.12.2019. The AO had assessed the appellant's total income at Rs.2,56,29,010, including an addition of Rs.1,90,96,600 under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The appellant's initial appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A), leading to the current appeal before the ITAT. The appellant argued that both the AO and CIT(A) had not provided sufficient time and opportunity for a fair hearing. The Departmental Representative for the Revenue did not object to the delay in filing the appeal, which was condoned by the ITAT.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 717270 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 14-10-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.K. AGARWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PRASHANT KR. VERMA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"I.T.A. No.616/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2017-18 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.616/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2017-18 Radha Kamal Upadhyaya 396/77, Kashmiri Mohalla, Chaupatiya, Lucknow-226003. PAN:AAFPU5062P Vs. DCIT/ACIT-6 PK Complex, Ram Mohan Rai Marg, Lucknow-226001. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA: A.M. (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.616/Lkw/2024 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017-18 against impugned appellate order dated 06/11/2023 (DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1057703904(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)”] for short]. (B) This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section 253(3) of IT Act. The application for condonation of delay is supported by an affidavit of the assessee. The Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to the delay being condoned. Being satisfied with the reasons stated in Appellant by Shri Prashant Kr. Verma, Adv Revenue by Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT (D.R.) Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.616/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2017-18 2 application seeking condonation of delay in filing of this appeal; we condone the delay in filing of this appeal and admit the appeal for decision on merits. (C) In this case, the assessment order dated 15.12.2019 was passed by the Assessing Officer (“AO”), u/s 143(3) of the Act whereby the assessee’s total income was assessed at Rs.2,56,29,010/-. In the aforesaid assessment order, addition amounting to Rs.1,90,96,600/- was made u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee’s appeal against the aforesaid assessment order was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 06.11.2023. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 06.11.2023 of the Ld. CIT(A) for non-prosecution. (C.1) In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”, for short) learned A.R. for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as learned CIT(A) have passed orders without affording sufficient time and opportunity to the assessee. In view of the foregoing, learned AR for the assessee submitted, the impugned order of learned CIT(A) should be set aside and the issue in dispute should be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass fresh assessment order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The learned CIT-D.R. for the Revenue expressed no objection. (D) We have heard both sides. We have perused the materials on record. In view of the submissions made by the Learned A. R. for the assessee, and there being no objection from learned Sr. D.R., we set aside the impugned appellate order dated 06.11.2023 and restore the matter in dispute to the Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.616/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2017-18 3 file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. (E) In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. (Order was pronounced in the open court on 13/08/2025) Sd/. Sd/. (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 13/08/2025 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., 5. CIT(A) Printed from counselvise.com "