Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee faced a delay of 355 days in filing the appeal due to her husband's prolonged illness, complex legal proceedings involving the family, and her own medical issues. She sold a property under distress to cover medical and legal expenses.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 355 days, acknowledging the genuine and plausible reasons provided by the assessee, supported by medical documents and court proceedings. The case was remanded to the Ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned due to personal medical and legal circumstances, and whether the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
250, 50C, 144, 147
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY
Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 06.06.2025, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Additional Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2 (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2021-22.
At the outset, it is observed that there is delay of 355 days in filing the instant appeal,on which the Assessee has claimed that her Poonam Singh husband Late Shri. Anup Rajan Rai, passed away after a prolonged and painful battle with Stage IV cancer, which was diagnosed in March 2012. The family of Assessee was entangled with multiple and complex legal proceedings commenced in 2004 and resulted into various Court’s proceedings including in the Bombay High Court and the Hon’ble Apex Court, which resulted into continuous mental, emotional and financial strains, leaving the family with limited capacity to manage routine financial and compliance obligation. The assessee was also diagnosed with various diseases in 2017, such as Acute Febrile Illnes, Urosepsis, Gastritis, Pancytopenia and Hyponatremia, which necessitated prolonged medical treatment and impairing her ability to manage the family’s financial and legal affairs. Thus, the Assessee sold the property under consideration which was subject matter in the assessment and appellate proceedings, in distress to bear medical expenses for her husband and herself, as well as to cover legal expenses arising from Court’s proceedings. The transaction of property therefore was distress sale concluded under compelling personal and financial hardship but not to avoid taxes. The assessee substantiated the aforesaid contention qua delay, by filing medical documents and the details of the Court proceedings and duly sworn affidavit. Though the Ld. DR refuted the claim of the assessee qua condonation of delay, however, not the documents, filed and demonstrated by the assessee.
Having considered the reasons stated by the assessee for condonation of delay, which are duly supported with relevant medical documents and Court proceedings and duly sworn affidavit as genuine, reasonable and plausible cause for condonation of delay, the delay of 355 days is condoned.
Coming to the merits of the case it is observed that though the assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 24,84,000/- being difference between the stamp duty value and the consideration Poonam Singh shown, made u/s 50C of the Act, vide assessment order dated 15.12.2018 u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act, by the Assessing Officer, by filing first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner, however despite of affording various opportunities as mentioned by ld. Commissioner in para No. 3 of the impugned order, the Assessee eventually made no compliance. Thus, in the constrained circumstances, the Ld. Commissioner having left with no option, ultimately dismissed the appeal of the assessee, affirming the aforesaid addition.
This court has given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar fact and circumstances, as noted above, the assessee due to medical exigencies and Court proceedings suffered by her husband and family members, remain non-compliant and also failed to file the present appeal within the limitation period. Thus, considering the aforesaid reasons, as set out by the assessee for condonation of delay for the non-appearance before the Ld. Commissioner as considerable and plausible, this court is inclined to remand the instant case to the file of the ld. commissioner for decision afresh, suffice to say by affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, however, subject to deposit of Rs. 5000/- in the Revenue Department under “other heads” within 15 days of the receipt of this order.
Thus, the case is accordingly remanded to the file of Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh in the aforesaid terms.
The assessee is also directed to file the relevant details and reply before the ld. Commissioner in the proceedings to be carried out. This Court clarify that in case of subsequent default, the assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.
Order pronounced in the open court on 31.10.2025.