RAM CHANDER CHILLAR,DELHI V. ITO, WARD-11(3), PUNE

ITA 2212/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Ram Chander Chillar against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which was passed under sections 143(3) and 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The primary contention was the dismissal of the assessee's application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, which the assessee argued was due to sufficient causes including non-receipt of bank statements and health issues. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's reasons for the delay and condoned it. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without discussing the merits, which is against the legal mandate. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the findings of the CIT(A) and remitted the case for a fresh decision on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 469579 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Other Referred Cases: Pr.CIT (Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay/(2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND DESAI
• Assessee Lawyers: GURJEET SINGH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Reasonable cause; Unexplained investment; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 250; 69

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \"बी\" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"B\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2212/PUN/2024 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Shri Ram Chander Chillar, 35/446, Arjan Vihar, Delhi Cantt., Delhi-110010 PAN-ACXPC6265G Vs ITO, Ward- 11(3), Pune Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Gurjeet Singh Revenue by : Shri Arvind Desai, Additional CIT DR Date of hearing : 10.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 20.02.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13 is directed against the order dated 19.08.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC) Delhi u/s 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (herein after also called ‘the Act’) which in turn is arising out of the Assessment Order passed u/s 250 dated 28.12.2017. 2. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. Because the action of Ld CIT(A)-NFAC is being challenged on facts & law for dismissing the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, despite there being sufficient causes with the assessee for not filing the appeal in time as per section 249(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which obstructed his action to file the appeal within the time limit. The appellant prays that the delay be condoned and appeal should be taken up for hearing. 2. Because the action is being challenged on facts and law for not providing reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessment order being passed is in violation of the principle of natural justice and without giving adequate time and opportunity to the appellant to present the case. 2 ITA No.2212/PUN/2024 3. Because the action for initiation, continuation and conclusion of assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 at an assessed income of Rs 36,01,790/- is being challenged on facts and law. 4. Because the action is being challenged on facts & law for making addition of Rs. 19,35,875 as unexplained investment u/s 69 whereas per assessee said amount has been invested out of disclosed sources. 5. For any consequential relief and/or legal claim arising out of this appeal and for any addition, deletion, amendment and modification in the grounds of appeal before the disposal of the same in the interest of substantial justice to the assessee. 3. At the outset ld. CIT(A) submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal by not condoning the delay of 30 days and has also not dealt with the merits of the case. Prayer made for grant of one more opportunity has been given for going back before ld. CIT(A). It is also submitted that the delay in filing the appeal before ld. CIT(A) was solely on ground of the Tax Professional who did not inform the assessee nor took any action for filing the appeal. 4. On the other hand, ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the lower authorities and submitted that there was an inordinate delay by 30 days. 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. In the impugned order. Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal by not condoning the delay of 30 days in filing of appeal. The reasons cited by the assessee for delay in filing the appeal mainly includes delay in receipt of bank statement and poor medical conditions of the appellant who is a Senior Citizen. Considering the same that there was a reasonable cause which prevented the assessee from filing the appeal in time. We condone the delay of 30 days in filing of appeal before ld. CIT(A). 3 ITA No.2212/PUN/2024 6. So far as merits of the case are concerned perusal of the impugned order, reveals that it has been passed ex-parte qua the assessee. The Id. CIT(A) has merely dismissed the appeal in limine, without discussing anything on merits of the issues. The settled position of law mandates that the ld.CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal by adjudicating the issues raised in appeal on merits as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act giving reasons thereof. In this regard, reference is being made to a decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT (Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay/(2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that Id.CIT(A) NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an ex parte order. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and the submissions made by the Id. Counsel for the assessee and there being no objection from the side of ld. Departmental Representative, we in the interest of justice deem it proper to give an opportunity to the assessee. In view thereof without dwelling into merits of the issue, the issues on merits in the instant appeals are being remitted to the file of Id.CIT(A) for de- novo adjudication. Assessee is at liberty to file any evidence as it deems expedient and ld.CIT(A) shall consider all the submissions of the assessee and pass the orders in conformity with the provisions envisaged u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is also directed to provide correct email id to the department for receiving the hearing notices from the ITBA portal. Assessee is further directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the Id.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. 7. Thus Findings of the ld.CIT(A) are set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee for the year under appeal are allowed for statistical purposes. 4 ITA No.2212/PUN/2024 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 20th day of February, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/ Pune; दििांक / Dated: 20th February, 2025. Neeta आिेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. धवभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"बी\" बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, \"B\" Bench, Pune. 5. गार्ा फाइल / Guard File. आिेशािुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "