SHRI DILIP VALLABHBHAI VAGHELA,GANDHIDHAM V. THE ITO WARD-1, GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

ITA 116/RJT/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Shri Dilip Vallabhbhai Vaghela against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which confirmed the addition of Rs. 19,12,068 as undisclosed income under section 69A of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2008-09. The appeal was initially filed late by 568 days, and the assessee sought condonation for this delay, citing illiteracy and lack of technical proficiency. However, the tribunal dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the assessee's lack of diligence in managing his tax affairs and failing to consult a tax professional sooner.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 28850 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 24-09-2024
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 27-02-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIMANYU SINGH YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: AA ST HA M AN IA R
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 250; 271(1)(c); 69A; 73

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,राजकोट Ûयायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOMETAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH: RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 116/RJT/2024 (Ǔनधा[रण वष[/Assessment Year: (2008-09) Shri Dilip Vallabhbhai Vaghela, Goyal Avenue, Plot No. 318, Ward 12B, Gandhidham-370201 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gandhidham èथायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ADHPV3416B (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Appellant by : Smt. Aastha Maniar, A.R. राजèव कȧ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/ Date of Hearing : 24/09/2024 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 15/10/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, “the Ld. CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi order dated 09.06.2022 for assessment year 2008-09. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, erred in law in dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant and passing an ex-parte order. 2. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of the AO of making addition of Rs. 19,12,068/- treating the same as undisclosed income and invoked the provisions of section 69A of the Act. 3. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, delete or alter one or more grounds of appeal.” Page | 2 ITA No.116/RJT/2024 A Y:2008-09 3. At the outset, it is noted by the registry of this Tribunal that the appeal is filed late by 568 days. In this connection, the appellant has filed an affidavit. The contents of the affidavit are reproduced:- “1. Dilip Vallabhbhai Vaghela, aged 73 years, residing at Plot No 250/2 Ward 10-A, Gurukul, Gandhidham- Kutch, do hereby state on oath the following facts. 1 That I am illiterate and don't understand the complexities of Income Tax matters nor I am tech-proficient and hence, not using any email address. 2 That I received a notice u/s 271(1)(c) dated 07.12 .2023 on 31.01 2024, copy of the envelope containing the post stamps is enclosed herewith. 3 That I thereafter contacted a tax professional who checked on my IT Portal and informed me that the order u/s 250 of the Act in quantum proceedings has already been passed on 09.06.2022. 4 That I was unaware of the passing of any appellate order and accordingly, no action could be taken on time. 5. That at this juncture, the process of filing of appeal was started and the appeal was filed on 27.02.2024 resulting into the delay of 570 days. 6 That late filing of this appeal has occurred on account of reasons and circumstances beyond my control. 7 I. in view of the above facts which I state on oath today, humbly request for condonation of delay in filing of the present appeal. I submit that I have made the above statements on oath which are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.” The assessee is a 73 years of age and he came to know about the order of ld. CIT(A), when the registered letter received by the assessee from the Department and requested for the delay may kindly be condoned. On the contrary, the ld. DR submitted that the case was instituted on 22-02-2016. Five notices were issued to the assessee to explain his case but all remained uncomplied with. No evidence was placed on record by the appellant. Page | 3 ITA No.116/RJT/2024 A Y:2008-09 4. We have heard the matter and noted that an appeal was filed before the Ld. CIT(A) on 22nd Feb, 2016 and the assessee was not vigilant enough to enquire the issue from his tax professional. No material has been brought on record about the old tax professional who was looking after the case. Therefore, we are of the view that the case of the assessee does not deserve huge delay is to be condoned. Therefore, we reject the request of the appellant for condonation of delay. Hence, the application of delay is hereby rejected and the appeal is dismissed. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order is pronounced on 15/10/2024 in the Open Court. Sd/- Sd/-S (DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI) (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Rajkot TRUE COPY Ǒदनांक/ Date: 15/10/2024 Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Rajkot 6.Guard File. By Order, Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot "