Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal after a delay of 475 days, attributing it to the death of her husband who managed the business and tax matters, leading to financial difficulties. The original assessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 143(3A) & 143(3B) with significant additions. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to lack of evidence.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, acknowledging the genuine hardship and bonafide reasons provided by the assessee. The matter was restored to the Jurisdictional AO for fresh adjudication on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned due to genuine hardship and whether the matter should be restored for fresh adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 143(3A), 143(3B), 68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: SMT BEENA PILLAI & SMT.RENU JAUHRI
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 16.08.2023 passed u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] for Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2018-19. 2. The grounds of appeal are as follows:
1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned Assessing Officer erred in making addition of Rs. 1, 39, 94, 607/-being interest Received Under the head income from other sources as against business offered by the appellant.
Further the learned A.O. as well as learned CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate the fact that the said interest received is already included in Audited Profit & Loss Account of the appellant and again added the same income from Other Sources amounts to double addition of same Income.
Under the facts and circumstances and in law the learned A.O. erred in computing G.P Ratio of A.Y.2017-18 and applying the same to AY 2018-19 and making Addition of Rs. 42, 90, 40/- based on assumption and surmises. 3. i) Under the facts circumstances and in law the learned A.O. made the addition of Rs. 14, 23,97,887/- being Loans & Advances given by invoking the provisions of section 68 of 1.T Act ii) The learned A.O failed to appreciate the fact that out of total of Rs. 14,23,97,887/-a sum of Rs. 5,51,47,018/- as on account of Sundry Debtors and balance Rs. 8,72,50,869/- are on account of Loans & Advances. iii) The learned A.O. failed to appreciate that section 68 cannot be invoked in the Present case of the appellant as the pre-requisite conditions of invoking section 68 of IT Act are not met.
4. Under the facts and circumstances and in law the learned A.O. erred in making Addition of Rs. 8,03,81,562/- being the total repayment of loans as reported in Form 3CD by invoking the provisions of section 68 of 1.T.Act.
The Appellant crave leave to add, amend, alter, and delete the ground/s of appeals At or before the hearing of appeal.”
At the outset, it is noted that the appeal is filed after a delay of 475 days.
The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons of delay. It is submitted that the husband of the assessee was running the business on her behalf, however, he died on 06.06.2018 and thereafter the assessee has been in financial difficulties. As a result, the chartered accountant handling the natter could not be paid his fees and thus the taxation matters remained unattended.
Considering the circumstances explained in the affidavit, we are of the view that the delay is on account of genuine hardship and for bonafide reasons and the same is, hereby, condoned.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed her return for A.Y. 2018- 19 on 28.10.2018 declaring income of Rs. 30,47,830/- for business of trading in shares and securities, textiles financing and sub broking in shares. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 143(3A) & 143(3B) at an income of Rs. 24,41,12,376/- after making various additions and disallowances. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before ld. CIT(A). In the absence of any evidence in support of various grounds of appeal
, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed present appeal before the Tribunal.
5. Before us, ld. AR has submitted a paperbook containing relevant documents and has explained that no proper compliance could be made by the assessee before lower authorities as the assessee had lost her husband in 2018, who was looking after the business as well as taxation matters and she was facing personal and financial difficulties as explained in the affidavit for condonation of delay.
He has, therefore, requested that the matter be restored to the ld. JAO of fresh adjudication on merits. Ld. DR has not objected to the said proposition.
After hearing both the parties, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to ld. Jurisdictional AO for fresh adjudication on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee.
In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order Pronounced in Open Court on 21.11.2025