Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against orders passed by NFAC for assessment year 2016-17. The appeals were filed with significant delays (230 days and 110 days). The assessee attributed the delays to a lack of familiarity with electronic communication and income tax proceedings, leading to procedural errors and late filing.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delays in filing the appeals, finding that the non-compliance was not wilful but due to genuine constraints of the assessee. The Tribunal set aside the ex parte orders of the CIT(A) and restored the matters to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeals should be condoned on the grounds of "sufficient cause", considering the assessee's unfamiliarity with electronic tax proceedings.
Sections Cited
147, 143(3), 148
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA
आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee against separate impugned orders of even dated 09/08/2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.147 / 143(3) for A.Y.2016-17.
At the outset, the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation in there is a delay of 230 days and in 110 days, in support, assessee has filed following Affidavit. In ITA Priyanka Nishad Pawar 3. Having given our thoughtful consideration to the totality of the facts and circumstances placed on record, and bearing in mind the explanation tendered by the assessee, it is evident that the delay in preferring the present appeals has not arisen out of any deliberate inaction or contumacious conduct. The assessee, as stated, is not adequately conversant with electronic modes of communication and is also unfamiliar with the procedural intricacies of income tax proceedings conducted through digital platforms. On account of such genuine constraints, the assessee was unable to effectively respond to the statutory notices issued from time to time. In these circumstances, and being satisfied that sufficient cause within the meaning of law has been demonstrated, we are of the considered view that the delay deserves to be condoned. Accordingly, the delay of 230 days in and the delay of 110 days in are hereby condoned in the interest of substantial justice.
At the threshold, it is noticed that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeals ex parte on account of non-compliance by the assessee. However, the explanation placed before us indicates that such non-compliance was not wilful but stemmed from the assessee’s limited familiarity with electronic communication and the procedural framework governing appellate proceedings under the Act. In our considered opinion, the ends of justice would be better served if the assessee is afforded one more effective opportunity to present her case.
Priyanka Nishad Pawar The appellate process is intended to advance justice and not to defeat it on mere technicalities. Therefore, in the interest of fairness and adherence to the principles of natural justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned orders and restore the matters to the file of the learned CIT(A), who shall adjudicate the appeals afresh, in accordance with law, after granting due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee for both the assessment years.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 29th December, 2025.