VIRENDRA PRATAP SINGH,RABUPURA V. NFAC, DELHI

ITA 5525/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Virendra Pratap Singh against orders from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning disallowances made under sections 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2017-18. The primary issues were the genuineness of agricultural income and the disallowance of a cash deposit, respectively. Both appeals were initially dismissed by the CIT(A) due to being barred by limitation. However, the ITAT condoned the delays and remitted the cases back to the AO for a fresh assessment on merits, emphasizing the need for substantial justice and a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 30505 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"1 ITA nos. 5525 & 5534/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 5525 & 5534/DEL/2024 Asstt. Yrs: 2011-12 & 2017-18 Virendra Pratap Singh, H. No. 4, Shanti Nagar, Rabupura Rural, Greater Noida-203209 PAN: BPMPS 4427 P Vs Assessing Officer, NFAC, Delhi. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by None Department represented by Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 25.02.2025 Date of pronouncement 27.02.2025 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant appeals, filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2011-12 & 2017-18, are directed against separate orders dated 14.08.2024 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of assessment orders dated 01.09.2021 for A.Y. 2011-12; and 15.10.2019 for A.Y. 2017-18 u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). Both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience. 2. None appears on behalf of the assessee at the time of call neither any adjournment of hearing sought for despite service of notice. Thus having no other alternative the matter is being decided ex parte. 2 ITA nos. 5525 & 5534/Del/2024 3. The issue involved in the case of assessee for A.Y. 2011-12 relates to disallowance of agricultural income on account of genuinity of the same to the tune of Rs. 21,75,000/- and the issue relating to the case of the assessee for A.Y. 2017- 18 relates to disallowance of cash deposit to the tune of Rs. 15,75,500/-. Both the issues were disposed of by the authorities below ex parte despite notices being served upon, the assessee was never represented. Before the learned CIT(A), the appeal in respect of A.Y. 2011-12 was found to be barred by limitation 255 days. Such delay has been prayed to be condoned on the ground that the counsel had not informed the assessee of the order passed by the ITO and only having the knowledge of the said disposal of the assessment of the assessee by the AO late, the appeal could be filed by the assessee before the First Appellate Authority. Such plea taken by the assessee before the First Appellate Authority was not found to be acceptable and thus the same was dismissed. 4. Before us the appeal preferred by the assessee is also found to be barred by limitation due to the same ground whereupon the justification by the assessee has been duly filed considering which the reason assigned by the assessee seems to be genuine and thus the delay is condoned. 5. The appeal preferred by the assessee for A.Y. 2017-18 is also barred by limitation for 29 days, delay whereof was duly explained by the assessee before us. Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the matter delay in respect of both the appeals are condoned. 6. So far as merit of the matter is concerned we find that the learned CIT(A) has not dealt with the matter on merit, rather dismissed the application being barred by limitation. Thus, having regard to these peculiar facts and circumstances of the matter it is found that in order to serve the interests of substantial justice, the 3 ITA nos. 5525 & 5534/Del/2024 assessee be given further opportunity of being heard by the authorities below to represent its case effectively. Accordingly, both the appeals are disposed of by remitting the issues to the file of the learned AO for passing a reasoned order upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidences on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matters. 7. The appeals preferred by the assessee are thus allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 27.02.2025. Sd/- (Ms. MADHUMITA ROY) JUDICIAL MEMBER *MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "