RAMESHBHAI DEVSIBHAI PATEL,SURAT V. ITO, WARD 3(3)(1), SURAT

ITA 1296/SRT/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Rameshbhai Devsibhai Patel against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which had dismissed his appeal due to an alleged delay of one day in filing. The original assessment order was passed under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, adding Rs.11,15,000 as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without considering the submissions made by the assessee and without issuing a show cause notice regarding the delay. The Tribunal found that the appeal was filed within the permissible time as the last day was a Sunday, and thus the filing on the next working day was valid.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26727 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MUKESH JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: SAPNESH R SHETH
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 144; 250; 13; 69A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1296/SRT/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical court hearing) Rameshbhai Devsibhai Patel Goveredhan Impex, 14, Diamond Estate, C/o. Shreenathji Engineering, Opp. Baroda Prestige, Varachha Road, Surat-395 006 बनाम/ Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3(3)(4), Surat, [jurisdictional Assessing Officer ITO,Ward- 3(3)(1), Surat] Room # 419, 4th Floor, Majura Gate, Opp. New CivilHospital, Surat-395 001 èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: ADWPP 2692 Q (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ /Respondent) िनधाŊįरती की ओर से /Appellant by Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, CA राजˢ की ओर से /Respondent by Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 13/03/2025 उद ्घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 13/03/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: This appeal by the assessee emanates from the order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 03.12.2024 by the CIT(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Act dated 23.11.2019. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1.On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in not admitting appeal of assessee by observing that there is a delay of 01 day 2 ITA No.1296/SRT/2024/AY.17-18 Rameshbhai D Patel whereas there is no such delay as the last day for filing of appeal i.e., the 30th day was 22nd December, 2019, which is Sunday& the appeal was filed on the next working day i.e., on Monday – 23rd December, 2019. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay without issuing any show cause notices and completely ignoring the submissions filed by assessee on various dates viz., 16.10.2023, 16.04.2024, 21.10.2024 and 22.11.2024 besides requesting CITI(A),NFAC on various dates viz., 22.02.2024, 13.06.2024, 16.08.2024 and 07.10.2024 to conclude the proceedings. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in confirming the action of AO in adding the amount of Rs.11,15,000/- u/s 69A of the Act as unexplained money. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in confirming the action of AO in invoking provisions of Section 115BBE and taxing the entire amount of Rs.11,15,000/- @ 60 percentage adding surcharge @ 25%. 5. It is therefore prayed that above addition made by Assessing Officer and confirmed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may please be deleted. 6. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of appeal.” 2. At the outset, the learned Authorized Representative (Ld.AR) submitted that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal due to delay of 1 day in filing the appeal before CIT(A). He submitted that the AO has also passed an ex parte order by making addition of Rs.11,15,000/- u/s 69A of the Act towards unexplained cash deposit in the bank account of assessee maintained with 3 ITA No.1296/SRT/2024/AY.17-18 Rameshbhai D Patel Dena Bank. The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) issued notices on four occasions and the assessee had filed written submissions, which are at pages 1 to 15 of the paper book. The CIT(A) did not consider the submission of the assessee and dismissed the appeal on the ground that delay of 1 day is not condonable because assessee has not established sufficient cause for the delay. The Ld. AR submitted that there was, in fact, no delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) because the last day for filing appeal was 22.12.2019 (30 days from the date of assessment order). However, 22.12.2019 was Sunday and the appeal was filed on next day i.e., Monday, 23.12.2019. Further, the CIT(A) did not issue any show cause notice regarding delay in filing appeal. He further submitted that the addition made by the AO u/s 144 of the Act is also not justified because the cash deposited is duly accounted for. 3. On the other hand, Ld. Senior Departmental Representative (Ld.Sr-DR) for the Revenue submitted that Bench may decide the issue. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the materials on record. The assessment order was passed u/s 144 of the Act on 23.11.2019. The appellant filed against the order before CIT(A) on 23.12.2019. As per sub- section (2) of Section 249 of the Act, an appeal shall be presented within 30 days following the date of service of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. Therefore, last date for filing of appeal was 22.12.2019. It is found that it was Sunday. Hence, the appellant could file appeal before CIT(A) on the next working day, i.e., Monday, 23.12.2019. Since the appeal was 4 ITA No.1296/SRT/2024/AY.17-18 Rameshbhai D Patel instituted on 23.12.2019, there was no delay in filing appeal before CIT(A). Hence, dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) is not in accordance with law. We, therefore, set aside the order of CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of AO with a direction to pass fresh assessment order in accordance with law after granting adequate opportunity of hearing to assessee. The assessee is directed to be vigilant and to furnish all details and explanation as needed by AO and not seek adjournment without valid reason. With this direction, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced on 13/03/2025 in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) Æयाियक सदÖय/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सदÖय/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER सूरत /Surat Ǒदनांक/ Date: 13 /03/2025 Dkp Outsourcing Sr.P.S* आदेश कì ÿितिलिप अúेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :  अपीलाथê/ The Appellant  ÿÂयथê/ The Respondent  आयकर आयुĉ/ CIT  आयकर आयुĉ (अपील)/ The CIT(A)  िवभागीय ÿितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, सूरत/ DR, ITAT, SURAT  गाडª फाईल/ Guard File // True Copy // By order/आदेश से, सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, सूरत "