VISHNU KUMAR KESARWANI ,PRAYAGRAJ V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2(3), ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

ITA 116/ALLD/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Vishnu Kumar Kesarwani against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which had dismissed his earlier appeal against an assessment order. The assessment order, passed ex-parte, assessed Kesarwani's income for the year 2011-12 at Rs.10,00,500. The primary contention in the appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was the non-receipt of notices by the assessee, which led to his non-compliance and absence during the initial hearings. The Tribunal found that the notices were not properly served to the designated email ID of the assessee, leading to a decision to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785839 (ITAT-ALLAHABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 17-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A.K. SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: MAYANK ARORA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Non compliance

Judgement Text

"I.T.A. No.116/Alld/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH “SMC”, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.116/Alld/2025 Assessment year:2011-12 Vishnu Kumar Kesarwani, 4 Khushhal Parwat, Prayagraj-211003 PAN:AUAPK8058N Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Allahabad (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M. (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.116/Alld/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 against impugned appellate order dated 21/03/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2023- 24/1063130244(1) of Addl/JCIT of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“ADDL/JCIT(A)” for short]. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under: Appellant by Shri Mayank Arora, Advocate Respondent by Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.116/Alld/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 2 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.116/Alld/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 3 (B) In this case assessment order dated 26/12/2018 was passed under section 147/144 of the I. T. Act whereby the assessee’s total income was assessed at Rs.10,00,500/-. The assessment order was passed by the Assessing Officer ex-parte qua the assessee. The assessee’s appeal against the assessment order was dismissed by the learned CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 21/03/2024. The aforesaid order dated 21/03/2024 of the learned CIT(A) was also passed ex-parte qua the appellant assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee has failed the present appeal in the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. (C) The appeal filed by the assessee is beyond the time prescribed u/s 253(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short). The assessee has filed application for condonation of delay in filing of this appeal along with an affidavit. The application for condonation of delay is reproduced below for the ease of reference: Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.116/Alld/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 4 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.116/Alld/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 5 (C.1) Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeal for hearing. The learned Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to assessee’s application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. In view of the foregoing, and Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.116/Alld/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 6 being convinced with the pleadings of the assessee, the delay in filing of this appeal is condoned; and the appeal is admitted for hearing. (D) At the time of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that reason for non compliance of the notices issued by the office of the learned CIT(A) are also the same that led to delay in filing of this application. He explained that the designated e-mail ID provided by the assessee in Form-35 (in which appeal was filed in the office of the learned CIT(A) was [e-mail]. However the notices issued by the learned CIT(A) were not served on this e-mail and therefore, the assessee was not aware of any notice issued by the learned CIT(A). He also submitted that there was no intention on the part of the assessee to evade or avoid hearings by the learned CIT(A) and the non compliance was solely because the assessee was not aware of the notices issued by the learned CIT(A). Therefore, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted, the assessee may be granted fresh opportunity to present his case before the learned CIT(A). The learned D.R. left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. (E) We are satisfied that the assessee could not represent his case before the learned CIT(A) because of the fact that the assessee was not aware about the notices issued by the learned CIT(A). Further the assessee can also not be faulted for non receipt of notices because the notices were not issued to the assessee on the designated e-mail ID as submitted in Form- 35. No material has been brought in our knowledge to show that any notice was served to the assessee in physical mode. In view of the foregoing, the impugned appellate order of learned CIT(A) is set aside and all the issued in dispute regarding the additions made in the assessment order are restored back to the file of the learned CIT(A) with the direction to pass fresh order Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.116/Alld/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 7 in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. (F) In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court on 31/10/2025) Sd/. Sd/. (SUBHASH MALGURIA) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated:31/10/2025 *Singh Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T. Printed from counselvise.com "