ZIAUL HASAN,UTTAR PRADESH V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(3)(1), ETAH

ITA 381/AGR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Ziaul Hasan against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, which dismissed his appeal due to a delay of 1394 days. The assessee argued that the delay was caused by the absence of service of the order and that the order was manually passed without any Document Identification Number (DIN), contrary to the presumption of electronic service by the CIT (A). The Tribunal found sufficient cause for the delay, noting that the assessment order was passed in the wrong name and without reference to PAN, and thus condoned the delay and restored the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785295 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAILENDRA SRIVASTAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: TARUN GUPTA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH ‘SMC’ : AGRA. BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.381/AGR/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Ziaul Hasan, vs. ITO, Ward 4(3)(1), 20/4, Chatta Jalesar, Etah. S.O. Etah, Etah – 207 302 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : AAEPQ4523A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Tarun Gupta, Advocate Shri Gurfan Ahmad, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 13.10.2025 Date of Order : 28.10.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 30.05.2025 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. At the time of hearing, ld. AR for the assessee submitted that there was a delay of 1394 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT (A) and the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of an Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.381/AGR/2025 inordinate delay of 1394 days and the ld. CIT (A) erroneously presumed that the order was served electronically despite the fact that : (i) The ruder was passed manually and does not bear any Document Identification Number (DIN); (ii) The assessment proceedings were also conducted manually and not through the income tax e-portal; (iii) No notices were served to the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings; (iv) The order was not served by any known mode of communication prescribed under the Act. Thus, he submitted that the CIT (A) erred in rejecting the condonation petition, despite clear documentary evidence of first service on 22.09.2023. He further submitted that even if there were to be any delay, it was due to the absence or service of the order and the assessee has sufficient and bona fide cause and the delay, if any, is neither intentional nor due to negligence. Further, he submitted that the ld. CIT (A) failed to adjudicate the case on merits. Accordingly, he prayed that the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT (A) may be condoned and the appeal be restored to the file of ld. CIT (A) to decide on merits. 3. On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue objected to the same and submitted that the delay is inordinate and should not be condoned. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.381/AGR/2025 4. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. After going through the submissions made by the ld. AR of the assessee, we also observe that the assessment order was passed in wrong name and without any reference to PAN. Therefore, we are of the view that there was sufficient cause in delay filing of the appeal before the ld. CIT (A), hence, in the interest of justice, we condone the same. Further, we restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to redo the assessment afresh as per law, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct assessee to make proper submissions and appear before the Assessing Officer on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 28th day of October, 2025. Sd/- sd/- (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated:28.10.2025 TS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals). 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "