SUNEET KAPOOR,UTTAR PRADESH V. ACIT, CIR 2(1)(1), GHAZIABAD

ITA 2496/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Suneet Kapoor, the appellant, who did not file his income tax return for the Assessment Year 2012-13. An assessment order was passed under sections 144 read with sections 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, assessing his income significantly. The appellant's delayed appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to inordinate delay, which was 699 days late. The appellant argued that his illness and subsequent rest, along with the COVID-19 pandemic, prevented timely filing. The Tribunal considered these circumstances and decided to condone the delay with a monetary condition and remanded the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474885 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAHIL KUMAR BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 2496/Del/2024 Suneet Kapoor Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2496/DEL/2024 (A.Y. 2012-13) Suneet Kapoor Ansal Gold Link-1, AE-179, Omega-1, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh PAN: AJUPK2902N Vs. ACIT CIR 2(1)(1) Income Tax Office, CGO-II, Hapur Chungi, Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh, 201002 Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Manoj Kumar, CA Revenue by Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 03/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement 06/03/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal/national Faceless Appeal Centre [‘NFAC)’ for short] dated 02/02/2024 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the Assessee had not filed return of income for Assessment Year 2012-13. An assessment order came to be passed on 06/12/2019 u/s 144 r.w. Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) by assessing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 1,97,63,946/-. The Assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 699 days and the Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 2 ITA No. 2496/Del/2024 Suneet Kapoor Vs. ACIT 02/02/2024, dismissed the Appeal on delay in latches. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 02/02/2024, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the Assessee was not well and the Doctor has advised him to take rest from 07/12/2019 to 20/04/2020 and due to Covid-19 Situations, the Assessee could not prefer the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), however, the Ld. CIT(A) erroneously dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee. Therefore, sought for allowing the Appeal. 4. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that there is an inordinate delay of 699 days, since the Assessee has not shown the sufficient cause for condoning the delay, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal on delay in latches. Therefore, sought for dismissal of the Appeal. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is the case of the Assessee that the Assessee was not well and he has taken medical treatment and also taken rest on the basis of Doctor’s advised from 07/12/2019 to 20/04/2020, therefore, the Assessee could not file the Appeal before the CIT(A)on time. To substantiate the said claim, the Assessee produced a Doctor’s Certificate 3 ITA No. 2496/Del/2024 Suneet Kapoor Vs. ACIT placed at Page No. 28 of the Paper Book. Considering the Doctor Certificate and the Covid-19 Situations, we are of the opinion that if the delay in filing the Appeal before the CIT (A) is condoned by imposing minimum cost of Rs. 3,000/- on the Assessee, substantiate justice would be rendered. 6. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) subject to payment of cost of Rs. 3,000/- payable to the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund. Since the Assessment Order is passed u/s 144 r.w. Section 147/148 of the Act and the Assessee has not produced the documents to defend his case against the proposed addition and in the facts and circumstances, we remand the issue involved in the present Appeal to the file of the A.O. with a direction to frame the de-novo assessment in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee subject to the Assessee. 7. Accordingly, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 06th March, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 06 .03.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 4 ITA No. 2496/Del/2024 Suneet Kapoor Vs. ACIT 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 5. DR: ITAT ITAT, NEW DELHI "