Case Number: ITA 1751/DEL/2020
Appellant: Vinod Bansal, Gurgaon
Respondent: ACIT Circle-35(1), New Delhi
Assessment Year: 2013-14
Case Filed On: 2020-10-22
Order Type: Final Tribunal Order
Date of Order: 2023-02-24
Pronounced On: 2023-02-24
This case involves an appeal filed by Vinod Bansal against the ACIT Circle-35(1), New Delhi for the assessment year 2013-14. The appeal, registered as ITA 1751/DEL/2020, was filed on October 22, 2020, and concerns the ex-parte order passed by CIT(A)-17, New Delhi on October 10, 2019.
The case was heard by the Delhi Bench ‘H’ of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) on January 5, 2023, with the order pronounced on February 24, 2023. The bench comprised Judicial Member Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad and Accountant Member Dr. B.R.R. Kumar.
The primary ground of appeal was the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without providing adequate opportunity for the appellant to present his case. The appellant contended that he was unable to attend the proceedings before the CIT(A) due to his imprisonment and the subsequent lockdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
The appellant’s representative, Shri Sahil Sharma, Advocate, and Shri Saurabh Nandi, Advocate, argued that the appellant was in custody from February 10, 2019, to May 15, 2020, and was released during the nationwide lockdown due to COVID-19. The appellant was unaware of the CIT(A)’s order, which was uploaded on the IT portal on October 22, 2019, and only became aware of it in September 2020. Consequently, the appeal was filed with a delay of 306 days, which the appellant requested to be condoned due to the exceptional circumstances.
The respondent, represented by Senior DR Shri Sumit Kumar Verma, supported the orders of the authorities below but had no serious objection to the delay in filing the appeal being condoned, given the circumstances presented by the appellant.
Upon careful consideration, the tribunal noted that the delay in filing the appeal was due to reasonable cause, as the appellant was imprisoned and later released during the COVID-19 pandemic. The tribunal found no willful default on the part of the appellant in the delay and thus condoned it.
Regarding the merits of the case, the tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution and sustained the order of the Assessing Officer without proper reasoning, resulting in a cryptic order. The tribunal emphasized the need for proper adjudication of the grounds raised by the appellant and restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, ensuring that the appellant is given an adequate opportunity to be heard.
In light of these findings, the tribunal set aside the orders of the authorities below and restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, ensuring that the appellant is given due opportunity of hearing. The tribunal’s decision emphasized the importance of adhering to the principles of natural justice in tax proceedings.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. The order was pronounced in the open court on February 24, 2023.
Members:
Copy forwarded to:
Vinod Bansal vs. ACIT Circle-35(1), New Delhi – 2013-14 – Appeal Dismissed for Non-Prosecution
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform