SATPAL YADAV,JAIPUR V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, JAIPUR

ITA 1070/JPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves multiple appeals filed by Sh. Satpal Yadav against various orders related to assessment and penalties for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20. The appeals were initially dismissed by the Learned CIT(A) due to non-compliance with the prescribed period of limitation for filing appeals. The appellant argued that the delay was due to the non-communication of notices by his Chartered Accountant, who failed to inform him about the reassessment proceedings. The Tribunal found that the appellant's inability to participate in the proceedings was justified and allowed the appeals, remanding the cases for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775649 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 26-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANITA RINES H
• Assessee Lawyers: R.S. POONIA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Reassessment proceedings; Period of limitation; Non compliance
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A-Bench” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1065 to 1068, 1070 & 1071/JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Sh. Satpal Yadav Shop No. 1, Old Delhi Road Opp. Payal Cinema, Gurgaon, Haryana. Cuke Vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACBPY9711D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1069/JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Year : 2019-20 Sh. Satpal Yadav Shop No. 1, Old Delhi Road Opp. Payal Cinema, Gurgaon, Haryana. Cuke Vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-4, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACBP9711D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Sh. R.S. Poonia, C.A. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 02/09/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 08/09/2025 vkns'k@ORDER Per Bench: Above captioned seven appeals are being disposed of by this common order, as the appeals involve common issues, and Ld. AR for the Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 1065 to 1071/JPR/2025 Sh. Satpal Yadav, Jaipur. appellant and Ld. DR for the department have argued the appeals simultaneously. 2. Appellant-assessee is feeling aggrieved by dismissal of its appeals. Vide order dated 21.07.2025 , passed by Learned CIT(A), u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), one appeal challenging assessment order u/s 147 of the Act, relating to the assessment year 2018-19 came to be dismissed; Another appeal challenging penalty order passed u/s 270A of the Act, relating to the assessment years 2018-19 came to be dismissed; Still another appeal challenging penalty order passed u/s 272A(i)(d) of the Act, relating to the assessment year 2018-19 came to be dismissed; And yet other appeal challenging penalty order u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act, relating to the assessment year 2018-19 came to be dismissed. 3. ITA No. 1069/JPR/2025, has been filed, as Learned CIT(A) dismissed appeal, challenging the assessment order dated 30.01.2024, relating to the assessment years 2019-20; ITA No. 1070/JPR/2025, has been filed so as to challenge the order dated 21.07.2025, whereby Learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee, challenging penalty order u/s 270A of the Act, relating to the assessment year 2019-20; Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 1065 to 1071/JPR/2025 Sh. Satpal Yadav, Jaipur. ITA No. 1071/JPR/2025 has been filed challenging order dated 21.07.2025, as thereby the appeal filed by the assessee, feeling aggrieved by penalty order u/s 272A(i)(d) of the Act , relating to the assessment year 2019-20, came to be dismissed. 4. Admittedly, Learned CIT(A) dismissed all the appeals in limine on the ground that the assessee had failed to file any proper application seeking condonation of delay, what to say of proving that there was any sufficient cause in filing of those appeals beyond prescribed period of limitation. 5. Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted that while filing all appeals in Form No. 35, it was specified that all those appeals were barred by limitation, and the ground for condonation of delay was put forth as under:- “The assessee was unaware about the reassessment proceedings as all notices were sent to the email and mobile number of their Chartered Accountant, which were mentioned in the income tax portal and therefore, the assessee could not respond to the notices due to non accessibility of email id.” 6. Ld. AR has submitted that previous Chartered Accountant engaged by the assessee did not inform the assessee, who is resident of Gurgaon, of the notices sent by the department in respect of these matters on his email address and also even though information was sent on the mobile number, and as such, the assessee could not appear even before the Assessing Officer. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 1065 to 1071/JPR/2025 Sh. Satpal Yadav, Jaipur. The prayer is that in the given situation the impugned orders be set aside and the matters be remanded to the Assessing Officer for decision afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in all the matters. 7. Ld. DR for the department has submitted list of notices sent by the Assessing Officer, and contended that there is no sufficient cause for non compliance with the said notices by the Assessee. 8. As regards delay in filing of the appeals before Learned CIT(A), Ld. AR for the appellant has placed on record, copy of order dated 24.12.2024 issued by the department to the Axis Bank, whereby the said bank was directed to attach the bank account of the assessee. Learned AR has submitted that immediately on receipt of said attachment, the assessee challenged assessment orders and penalty orders before Learned CIT(A) on the same date i.e. 24.12.2024. The contention is that filing of the appeals on the very day the attachment order was issued, supports the claim of the assessee that he was prevented from participating in the proceedings before the Assessing Officer when his Chartered Accountant (C.A.) previously engaged, did not inform him. 9. In such a situation, when allegation is leveled by an assessee that the Chartered Accountant engaged by him did not communicate receipt of Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No. 1065 to 1071/JPR/2025 Sh. Satpal Yadav, Jaipur. notices or other communications from the department, affidavit of the concerned C.A. should also be filed. However, we rarely find any such affidavit from CA, against whom such an allegation is leveled by the assessee, to justify non communication of the notices etc. by him to the assessee. Even in this case the assessee has not submitted any affidavit of the C.A. previously engaged, who is stated to have failed in his duty to inform the assessee of the notices received from the Assessing Officer. 10. The fact remains that the department issued attachment order dated 26.12.2024 whereupon the assessee contacted his C.A. and learnt about notices and other communications sent by the department to the said C.A., and then by engaging another C.A., he preferred all the 7 appeals before Learned CIT(A) on the very day the attachment order was issued. 11. In the given situation, in the interest of justice, we deem it a fit case to allow the condonation of delay in filing of the appeals before Learned CIT(A). 12. As noticed above, the assessee could not participate in the assessment/penalty proceedings as well, before the Assessing Officer, for the above said reason i.e. non communication of notices by his C.A. Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA No. 1065 to 1071/JPR/2025 Sh. Satpal Yadav, Jaipur. In the given situation, keeping in view the issues involved, we also deem it just that all these matters are remitted to the Assessing Officer for decision afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Result 13. In view of the above discussion and findings, all the appeals are disposed of, for statistical purpose and in the interest of justice, the matters are restored to the files of the Assessing Officer for decision afresh, providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Files be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Copy of the common order be placed in each connected files hereby disposed of. Order pronounced in the open court on 08/09/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 08/09/2025 *Santosh vkns'k dh izfrfyfivxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- Sh. Satpal Yadav, Gurgaon. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur. DCIT, Central Circle-4, Jaipur. Printed from counselvise.com 7 ITA No. 1065 to 1071/JPR/2025 Sh. Satpal Yadav, Jaipur. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File ITA No. 1065 to 1071/JPR/2025) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asstt. Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "