VIRENDRA KUMAR,NEW DELHI V. ITO WARD 58(1), DELHI

ITA 1846/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Virendra Kumar against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi, which was dated 24.01.2025 for the Assessment Year 2021-22. The primary grievance of the assessee was that the lower authorities had decided the appeal ex-parte without his participation, as he had not received any notices regarding the assessment or appellate proceedings. The assessee, represented by Shri Anil Kumar Jain and Shri Aslam, CA, argued that the income reported as agricultural was actually the sales consideration of agricultural land, which was partially exempt. The Department was represented by Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR. The Tribunal admitted additional evidence under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, considering the circumstances under which the assessee could not participate in the earlier proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 716653 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Appeal Filed On: 25-03-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Tek Ram vs. CIT (2013) 357 ITR 133I
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANISH GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR JAIN
• Keywords: Business income; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Earning of tax free income
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"Page 1 of 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1846/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2021-22] Shri Virendra Kumar Vs. The I.T.O C/o Anil Jain DD & Co., Ward -58(1) 611, Surya Kiran Building New Delhi 19, K.G. Marg, Delhi PAN – CHVPK 9273 P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anil Kumar Jain, CA Shri Aslam, CA Department By : Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 11.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 22.08.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, A.M:- This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of NFAC, New Delhi dated 24.01.2025 for A.Y 2021-22. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1846/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2021-22] Shri Virendra Kumar Page 2 of 5 2. Representatives of both the sides were heard at length. Case records carefully perused. Relevant documentary evidence brought on record duly considered in light of Rule 18(6) of the ITAT Rules. 3. The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the lower authorities have grossly erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte. 4. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the assessee has filed an application under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules to admit additional evidences. It is submitted that the Ld. AO had vide order dated 19.12.2022 made addition u/s 69A of the IT Act, amounting to Rs. 2,32,17,000/- on account of agricultural income which was erroneously shown in the ITR as agricultural income and also under the schedule of exempt income as agricultural receipt whereas it was basically the sales consideration of the agricultural rural land (being 1/3d of the total sales consideration of Rs. 6,96,51,000/-). The evidences of the same could not be produced before the lower authorities as the assessee was having no knowledge of any notice issued by the FAO during the assessment proceeding as well as notices issued by the NFAC during the appellate proceeding as the e-mail id provided in the IT return and in Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1846/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2021-22] Shri Virendra Kumar Page 3 of 5 the appeal documents filed before the CIT(A) was of the consultant who never informed about any notice issued by the assessing officer faceless as well as CIT(A) faceless. 5. Relying on the ratio laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tek Ram vs. CIT (2013) 357 ITR 133I, the assessee pleaded for admission of additional evidence as these are supportive in nature. Considering the affidavit of the assessee and the decision of the hon’ble Supreme Court above, the additional evidence is admitted. 7. Facts on record show that assessment was framed u/s 144 r.w 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short]. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is a farmer and the order passed by the Assessing Officer as well as the ld. CIT(A) against the assessee is ex-parte. The ld. counsel for the assessee pleaded that the assessee could not participate in the assessment proceedings as he had not received any notice. 8. Per contra, the ld. DR fairly conceded that the orders of the ld. CIT(A) are ex- parte. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1846/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2021-22] Shri Virendra Kumar Page 4 of 5 9. Having heard the rival submissions, we are of the considered view that both the lower authorities ought to have given a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Further, we find that the assessee has filed additional evidence u/r 29 of the I.T. Rules. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it fit to restore the appeal to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is directed to decide the appeal afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. and considering the additional evidences furnished by the assessee. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the proceedings and furnish documents/evidence as required by the Assessing Officer. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 1846/DEL/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open court on 22.08.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [MADHUMITA ROY] [NAVEEN CHANDRA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 22nd AUGUST, 2025. VL/ Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1846/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2021-22] Shri Virendra Kumar Page 5 of 5 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) Asst. Registrar, 5. DR ITAT, New Delhi Sl No. PARTICULARS DATES 1. Date of dictation of Tribunal Order . 2. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictation Member 3. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the other Member 4. Date on which the approved draft Tribunal Order comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. 5. Date on which the fair Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 6. Date on which the signed order comes back to the Sr. P.S./P.S 7. Date on which the final Tribunal Order is uploaded by the Sr. P.S./P.S. on official website 8. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk alongwith Tribunal Order 9. Date of killing off the disposed of files on the judiSIS portal of ITAT by the Bench Clerks 10. Date on which the file goes to the Supervisor (Judicial) 11. The date on which the file goes for xerox 12. The date on which the file goes for endorsement 13. The date on which the file goes to the Superintendent for checking 14. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the Tribunal order 15. Date on which the file goes to the dispatch section 16. Date of Dispatch of the Order Printed from counselvise.com "