Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) as barred by limitation. The assessee had explained the delay in filing due to a GST search action, personal medical issues of a relative, and issues with the residential premise and chartered accountant.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had not properly dealt with the assessee's application for condonation of delay. The order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the case was remanded back for adjudication on merits, including considering the delay condonation and additional evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal as barred by limitation without properly considering the reasons for delay, and whether the assessee should be allowed to present the case on merits.
Sections Cited
143(3), 144B, 56(2)(x), 68, 115BBE, 80C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Dharmesh Girish Dixit R/N-6, Mistry Bhuvan, Opp. Tipco Raheja Heights Rani Sati Road, Malad (East), Mumbai – 400097 Maharashtra. [PAN:AENPD6905N] …………. Appellant Income Tax Officer Ward 41(3)(1), Vs Mumbai Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051. …………. Respondent Maharashtra. Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala For the Respondent/Department : Shri Annavaran Kosuri Date Conclusion of hearing : 22.09.2025 Pronouncement of order : 29.09.2025 O R D E R [ Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member:
1. 1. The present appeal preferred by the Assessee is directed against the order, dated 19/06/2025, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’] whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal against the Assessment Order, dated 23/04/2021, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2018-2019.
2. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : “1.0 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in Law, Ld. 2 Assessment Year 2018-2019 CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing the 1st appeal of 738 days and ought to have considered the bonafide reasons and compelling circumstances, supported with affidavit and other documents, that had precluded the appellant to file the 1st appeal in time; 2.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the bonafide reasons that had precluded the appellant to participate in the assessment proceedings. 3.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition u/s.56(2)(x) of Gift received from mother of Rs.3,00,000/-; 4.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition u/s.68 r.w.s.115BBE of unsecured loans received of Rs.1,15,00,000/-; 5.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the disallowance of rent expense of Rs.3,24,500/-; 6.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the disallowance of deduction claimed u/s.80C of Rs.1,50,000/-.
3. We have heard both the sides and perused the material on record.
4. On perusal of record, it emerges that the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal preferred by the Assessee as barred by limitation on the ground that the Assessee has failed to demonstrate sufficient cause without taking into consideration the submissions filed by the Assessee on 08/05/2025 (Acknowledge No. 958668631080525) filed by the Assessee in response to notice of hearing, dated 05/05/2025 issued by the Ld. CIT(A). During the course of hearing the Learned Authorized Representative for the Assessee has placed reliance upon the Affidavit filed before the Ld. CIT(A) (alongwith the aforesaid submissions) wherein it was stated as under:
“Shri Dharmesh G Dixit having my place of residence situated at A- 3 Assessment Year 2018-2019 1602, Triveni Tower, New Mhada Colony, Ekta Nagar, Kandivali (West). Mumbai-400067, do hereby declare on solemn affirmation as under- “1.0 THAT, I am assessed to Income tax under the jurisdiction of Income tax officer Ward 41(3)(1), Mumbai on holding the PAN-AENPD6905N: 2.0 THAT, Ld. AO had passed the assessment order for Assessment-year 2018-19 on 23/04/2021 and in case, the date of service is considered as 23/04/2021, then the due date to file the 1st appeal was 23/05/2021. However, the 1 appeal had been filed on 06/03/2024, which is late by 738 days (Excluding COVID-19 pandemic period). The delay in filing of the 1" appeal had occurred under bonafide reasons and compelling circumstances beyond my control, stated as under: a) A search action was conducted by the GST authorities at my business premise on 22/01/2019 (copy of panchnama enclosed) and my entire books if account, records including computer systems, bills and other documents were seized by the authorities. I was extremely occupied and mentally disturbed in attending the GST investigation matter and was required to make frequent visits before the GST authorities and my non availability had resulted in delay in filing the 1 appeal in time; b) I had gone out of Mumbai for substantial period of time to attend the serious medical illness of my brother-in- law Late Mr. Dheeraj Singh, since he was suffering from throat cancer and he ultimately died on 20/08/2022 (copy of death certificate enclosed) and my non-presence in Mumbai had resulted in non- furnishing of the appeal in time; c) I did not receive the service of assessment order, since my residential premise situated at Mistry Bhuwan, Rani Sati Marg, Malad (East), Mumbai had gone in redevelopment. The e-notices were sent at email address belonging to my earlier chartered accountant named Shri Hemang Shah. However, due to dispute with my said chartered accountant and particularly for non-payment of professional fees, the said Chartered Accountant did not assist me to file the appeal in time. I am an undergraduate and am not conversant with 4 Assessment Year 2018-2019 the appeal proceeding and does not possess adequate knowledge of Income tax law and such had precluded me to file the appeal in time; I declare that there is no wilful or deliberate attempt nor any gross negligence to delay the filing of appeal before the 1ª Appellate Authority and such delay occurred under the bonafide reasons as stated herein above. I respectfully make a prayer before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) to adopt a liberal approach and condone the delay in filing of the appeal and grant a final opportunity to represent the case on merits; 3.0 THAT, I could not participate in assessment proceeding and could not furnish the relevant details/ documents on assessment record under the bonafide reasons and compelling circumstances beyond my control, stated as under :- a) A search action was conducted by the GST authorities at my business premise on 22/01/2019 (copy of panchnama enclosed) and my entire books if account, records including computer systems, bills and other documents were seized by the authorities. I was extremely occupied and mentally disturbed in attending the GST investigation matter and was required to make frequent visits before the GST authorities and non-availability of books of account and records had precluded me to file the relevant details and documents on assessment record; b) I had gone out of Mumbai for substantial period of time to attend the serious medical illness of my brother-in- law Late Mr. Dheeraj Singh, since he was suffering from throat cancer and he ultimately died on 20/08/2022 (copy of death certificate enclosed) and my non-presence in Mumbai had resulted in non- furnishing the relevant details and documents on assessment record; c) I did not receive the notice of hearing, since my residential premise situated at Mistry Bhuwan, Rani Sati Marg, Malad (East). Mumbai had gone in redevelopment. The e-notices were sent at email address belonging to my earlier chartered accountant 5 Assessment Year 2018-2019 named Shri Hemang Shah. However, due to dispute with my said chartered accountant and particularly for non-payment of professional fees, the said Chartered Accountant did not assist me to compile the details. I am an undergraduate and am not conversant with the assessment proceeding and does not possess adequate knowledge of Income tax law and such had precluded me to file the relevant details and documents on assessment record. I declare that there is no wilful or deliberate attempt nor any gross negligence for non-furnishing the details and documents on record and such non-compliance had occurred under the bonafide reasons as stated herein above. 1 respectfully make a prayer before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) to adopt a liberal approach and admit the documents as additional evidence u/r 46A of Income Tax Rules, 1962 and grant a final opportunity to represent the case on merits;”
On perusal of the above it emerges that the Assessee had explained that the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld CIT(A) was occasioned on account of (a) Covid-19 Pandemic, (b) books of accounts and records of the Assessee were seized by GST Authorities, (c) attending to medical condition of brother-in-law of the Assessee who was suffering from throat cancer and ultimately passed away on 20/08/2022, (d) non-service of Assessment Order since the residential premises had gone in re-development, and (e) the email addresses on record pertain to earlier chartered accountant who had stopped attending the matters of the Assessee on account of non- payment/dispute of professional fees. However, on perusal of the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the impugned order does not deal with any of the reasons/explanation furnished by the Assessee for delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Given the facts of the present case, we deem it appropriate set aside the Order, dated 19/06/2025, passed by the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to adjudicate the application seeking condonation of delay, and the grounds raised
by the Assessee in appeal on merits, as the 6. Assessment Year 2018-2019 case may be, along with application for bring on record additional evidence afresh after taking into consideration the explanation offered by the Assessee and after granting the Assessee sufficient opportunity of being heard in relation to the same. Thus, Ground No. 1 raised by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes while Ground No.2 to 6 are dismissed as having been rendered infructuous at this stage since we have set aside the impugned order with the above directions.
In result, the present appeal preferred by the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.