RAVINDER SINGH,FEROZEPUR CANTT V. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA

ITA 574/CHANDI/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Ravinder Singh, M/s Khullar Auto Parts, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ludhiana, for the assessment year 2019-20. The appeal was initially time-barred by 198 days, and a separate application for condonation of delay was filed. The assessee argued that he was not informed about the hearing dates or the final order by his counsel, leading to an ex-parte decision by the CIT (Appeals). The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's request for a re-hearing on the grounds that the CIT (Appeals) should have decided the case on merits despite the absence of the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 783508 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, Income Tax Rules
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RANJIT KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHRAY SARANA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ “एकल” चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “SMC” CHANDIGARH Įी संजय गग[, ÛयाǓयक सदèय BEFORE: SH. SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.574/CHD/2024 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Shri Ravinder Singh, M/s Khullar Auto Parts, G.T. Road, Ferozepur Cantt. बनाम The DCIT, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana. èथायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BKHPS1705C अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashray Sarana, CA राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur,Addl. CIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 06.11.2025 उदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 07.11.2025 VIRTUAL HEARING आदेश/ORDER The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 31.08.2023 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Ludhiana [in short ‘the CIT (Appeals)] pertaining to 2019-20 assessment year. Printed from counselvise.com ITA 574/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2019-20 2 2. The appeal is time barred by 198 days. A separate application for condonation of delay has been filed wherein it has been pleaded that the concerned counsel for the assessee did not inform the assessee of the dates of hearing before ld.CIT (Appeals) and even passing of the final order. That the assessee did not receive the copy of the order in physical form. That the order, sent on e-mail of the consultant, was not forwarded by him to the assessee. The ld. Counsel has further brought my attention to the impugned order of the CIT (Appeals) to submit that the same is an ex-parte order of the CIT (Appeals). He has further submitted that even a perusal of the impugned order also reveals that the same has not been passed by the ld.CIT (Appeals) on merits, rather the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for want of prosecution. 2.1 As per the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act read with Income Tax Rules, even in case the assessee did not participate in the appellate proceedings before the CIT (Appeals), the ld.CIT (Appeals) was supposed to pass the order on merits. On the other hand the assessee has explained that he was not aware of the passing of the order, resulting into the ex-parte order of the ld.CIT Printed from counselvise.com ITA 574/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2019-20 3 (Appeals) and delay of 198 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. 3. The ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee has a fair case on merits and that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present his case before the ld.CIT (Appeals). The assessee has pleaded that the Assessing Officer (in short ‘the AO’) has wrongly made the addition of Rs.1,20,000/- and has further applied the rate of tax as per the provisions of Section 115BBE of the Act on income of Rs.9,70,000/- whereas, the normal tax rate was required to be applied on the said income of Rs.9,70,000/-. 4. After considering the rival submissions and going through the record, I am of the view that interest of justice will be well served if the assessee is given an opportunity to present his case before the ld.CIT (Appeals), however, subject to payment of a reasonable cost which I assess at Rs.5000/- to be deposited in Prime Minister Relief Fund. Accordingly, the impugned order of the CIT (Appeals) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of ld.CIT (Appeals) for decision afresh, but subject to the condition that the assessee will deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the Prime Minister Relief Fund and Printed from counselvise.com ITA 574/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2019-20 4 furnish the evidence/receipt of such deposit before the ld.CIT (Appeals). 5. The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 07 t h November,2025. Sd/- ( संजय गग[) (SANJAY GARG ) ÛयाǓयक सदèय/ Judicial Member “Poonam” आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत/ CIT 4. आयकर आयुÈत (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "