SARAFAT ALI KHAN,SIKAR, RAJASTHAN. V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 1199/JPR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sh. Sarafat Ali Khan Pathan against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC, which arose from an assessment order for the assessment year 2012-13 framed under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act by the ITO, Ward 4(3), Jaipur. The assessment order included additions for unexplained investments and household expenses totaling Rs. 12,00,000. The assessee had not filed any return of income for the relevant assessment year. The CIT(A) had previously issued notices during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the assessee failed to provide explanations for the additions made. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and the interest of justice, decided to remit the matter back to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination and a speaking order as required under section 250(6) of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 705359 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM SINGH CHOUDHARY
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause; Unexplained investment
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

" vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh euh\"k cksjkM] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1199/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Sh. Sarafat Ali Khan Pathan 322, Mohalla Musalmano Ka. Village Davar, Khandala, Sikar cuke Vs. ITO, Ward -4(3), Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AYNPO7552P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 30/06/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement :03/07/2025 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: MANISH BORAD, AM This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A), NFAC dated 22.07.2024 arising out of the order for A.Y 2012-13 framed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act dated 23.11.2019 framed by ITO, Ward 4(3), Jaipur. 2. The registry has informed that there is a delay of 2 days in filing the present appeal. Applications for condonation of delay has ITA No. 1199/JPR/2024 Sarafat Lal Khan vs. ITO 2 been filed along with an affidavit mentioning the reasonable cause giving rise to the said delay. After hearing ld. DR and on perusal of affidavit filed for condoning delay I find that for bona fide reasons, the assessee could not file appeal in time and therefore, condone the delay in filing of instant the appeal and admit it for adjudication. 3. When the case called for none appeared on behalf of the assessee. A valid notice of hearing has been issued to the assessee. I therefore, proceed to adjudicate the appeal, with the assistance of ld. Departmental representative. 4. I find that the assessment order for A.Y 2012-13 framed on 23.11.2019 is best judgment assessment u/s 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act. The assessee had not filed any return of income. Addition of Rs. 12,00,000/- has been made for unexplained investments at Rs. 10,00,000/- and unexplained household expenses at Rs. 2,00,000/-. The assessee challenged the additions before ld. CIT(A) but thereafter could not furnish any details to explain the source of alleged investments as well as household expenses. Considering the fact that appeal before ld. CIT(A) was instituted on 07.01.2020 and few notice of hearing have been issued during the ITA No. 1199/JPR/2024 Sarafat Lal Khan vs. ITO 3 Covind-19 pandemic and that the assessee would not have gained from not appearing before ld. CIT(A), therefore, in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, I remit back all the issues raised in the instant appeal on merits to the file of ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. On being provided reasonable opportunity of hearing by ld. CIT(A), the assessee shall furnish all relevant details (if any) to explain the source of alleged investments and unexplained household explained and ld. CIT(A) may call for a remand report from ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. 5. Thereafter, CIT(A), NFAC shall pass a speaking order as contemplated in section 250(6) of the Act. The assessee should also refrain from seeking unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 03/07/2025. Sd/- ¼ euh\"k cksjkM ½ (Manish Borad) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member ITA No. 1199/JPR/2024 Sarafat Lal Khan vs. ITO 4 Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 03/07/2025 *Ganesh Kumar, Sr. PS vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Sarafat Ali Khan, Sikar 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward 4(3), Jaipur 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A) 5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur. 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File { ITA No. 1199/JPR/2024} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar "