RAJENDER SINGH RANGRA,PALAMPUR V. ITO WARD - 5(3)(2), GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR

ITA 1732/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Rajender Singh Rangra, against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi, which dismissed the appeal ex parte due to a significant delay in filing. The assessee contended that the dismissal was unjust as the notices and the assessment order were sent to an old address, despite the new address being communicated to the Department. The tribunal found that the Ld. CIT(A) did not adequately address the assessee's claims of non-service of notices and the delay in filing the appeal. Consequently, the tribunal restored the appeal to the Ld. CIT(A) for a thorough examination of these issues.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 43530 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANDEEP PANWAR
• Assessee Lawyers: BASANT KUMAR; ANUPAM SRIVASTAVA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 148; 144

Judgement Text

"I.T.A.No.1732/Del/2024 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1732/Del/2024 िनधा\tरणवष\t/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Rajender Singh Rangra 26A, SWO Colony, Raipur Tea Estate, Thakurdwara, Maranda, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh. बनाम Vs. ITO, Ward 5(3)(2), Aayakar Bhawan, A-20, Sector-24, Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. PAN No.AASPR0184N अपीलाथ\u0012 Appellant \u0014\u0015यथ\u0012/Respondent िनधा\u0007\bरतीक\rओरसे /Assessee by Shri Basant Kumar, Adv. & Shri Anupam Srivastava, CA राज\u0012वक\rओरसे /Revenue by Shri Mandeep Panwar, Sr. DR सुनवाईक\rतारीख/ Date of hearing: 10.01.2025 उ\u0018ोषणाक\rतारीख/Pronouncement on 24.01.2025 आदेश /O R D E R This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi dated 23.02.2024 for the AY 2012-13. 2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed ex parte without giving proper opportunity of being heard. Ld. Counsel submits that in the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) it is observed that there is a delay in filing of appeal as the demand notice and assessment order was dated I.T.A.No.1732/Del/2024 2 12.12.2019 and the appeal was presented on 01.03.2022 with a delay of 780 days. The Ld. Counsel submits that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by stating that the assessee had not removed defects and not filed delay condonation application. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that three notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) were regarding hearing of appeal on merit and in response to the same the assessee filed written submissions with supporting documents. The Ld. Counsel referring to para 11 of statement of facts filed before the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that assessee has clearly stated that neither any notices nor assessment order were served to the assessee. It was stated before the Ld. CIT(A) that first time assessment order was received on 07.02.2022 and the appeal was filed thereafter. Ld. Counsel submits that assessee requested Ld. CIT(A) to give an opportunity to file condonation for delay in filing appeal if the assessment order was served earlier. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact the assessee has raised grounds for non-service of notice before the Ld. CIT(A) but the Ld. CIT(A) did not give any opportunity to explain. 3. Ld. Counsel further submits that all the notices and assessment order were sent to old address despite the fact that the new address was intimated to the Department before issuance of I.T.A.No.1732/Del/2024 3 notice u/s 148 of the Act. Therefore, Ld. Counsel submits that the appeal be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) or the Assessing Officer as the assessment was made u/s 144 of the Act for completing the assessment denovo. 4. Ld. DR has no serious objection in restoring the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer. 5. Heard rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. In this case, both assessment as well as the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was passed ex parte. It is the contention of the assesse that the notices were all sent to the old address though the assessee had intimated the new address even before the issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act by the Assessing Officer. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel that even before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee has raised non- service of notices u/s 148 of the Act. However, on perusal of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) order, the Ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessment order is dated 12.12.2019, and the appeal was filed by the assessee on 01.03.2022 and there is a delay of 780 days. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as the assessee did not explain the delay. However, as per the assessee’s contention there is no delay as the assessment order was never served on the assessee prior to 07.02.2022. Since the submission of the assessee was not examined I.T.A.No.1732/Del/2024 4 by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) this appeal is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) who shall examine the contention of the assessee and ascertain whether the assessment order was served on the assessee and in case the assessment order is served prior to 07.02.2022 the assessee be given an opportunity to file delay condonation petition and to consider the same on merits and decide the appeal in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. With the above observations, this appeal is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 24/01/2025 Sd/- (C.N. PRASAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 24.01.2025 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S. Copy of order sent to- Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT/ CIT (A)/ ITAT (DR)/Guard file of ITAT. By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT: Delhi Benches-Delhi "