vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk

0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oaJh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1261/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Desh Raj Jakhar cuke The ITO Village: Goverdhanpura Vs. Neem Ka Thana Post: Nayabass, Tehsil: Neem Ka Thana Distt. Sikar Distt: Sikar 332 713 (Raj_

LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AHVPJ 8029 L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Shaffi Mohd. Advocate jktLo dh vksj l@s Revenue by: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT -DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 23/12/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 25 /02/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal filed by the assessee isdirected against the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 20-03-2024, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ for short NFAC/CIT(A)] for the assessment year 2014-15 raising therein following grounds appeal:

‘’1. That the AO erred in initiating the proceedings u/s 148 of the Act.

2. That the AO erred in making the addition of Rs.49,09,500/- u/s 69 as the assessee has proved the prima facie burden about the source of amount.

3. That the AO erred in initiating the penalty u/s 271(1)© of the Act.

2.1 During the course of hearing, the Bench noticed that there is delay of 148 days in filing the appeal by the assessee for which the assessee has filed an application dated 15-10-2024 for condonation of delay giving therein following reasons:

‘’1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless appeals Centre passed the order in appeal of the assessee on 20.03.2024.

2. That the order was uploaded on the portal not communicated by any other mode of service, to me.

3. That when more than sufficient time has been passed then, I have enquired by status of my appeal on 10.10.2024, then my consultant informed me that order in appeal has been passed on 20.03.2024 and the same is available on the portal.

But this fact was not communicated to me earlier.

4. That thereafter I have contacted him for further proceedings on 11.10.2024. He advised me file second before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal within

60 days from the date of service of order of CIT(A). That period is already over.

5. That thereafter I have contacted another advocate, who is doing the work of appeals etc. on 12.10.2024 and handed over the paper to him for preparation of appeal.

6. That because of the above reasons the appeal could not be filed within the time limitation as prescribed in the Income Tax Act which resulted in 118day's delay from the date of service of assessment order i.c. 21.03.2024.

7. That the delay in filing the present appeal is bona-fide, there is no mala-fide intention in filing the appeal after limitation period. This occurs only because of the reasons mentioned in above paras, hence requested that the delaymay kindly be condoned.

It is therefore, humbly prayed that the present application under Section 5 of Limitation Act may kindly be allowed and the Appeal filed by the Appellant assessee may be treated to been filed in limitation and the delay in filing of the appeal may kindly be condoned.

To this effect, the assessee has filed an affidavit deposing therein the above facts of the case as to delay of 148 days made in filing the above appeal.

2.2 On the other hand, the ld. DR objected to such inordinate delay of 148 in filing the appeal and submitted that the Court may decide the issue as deemed fit and proper in the case.

2.3 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Bench from the submissions of the assessee noticed that order was uploaded by the Department on its portal and this fact was not communicated to the assessee by serving the order through postal service and thus the assessee was not able to get proper communication. Th