AJAY DHARAMPRAKASH BHATIA,THANE vs. WARD 2(1), THANE, THANE

We heard the rival submissions and considered the documents available in the record. The assessee is a non-filer of Income tax Return. The assessee’s case was re-opened u/s. 147 of the Act. During the course of assessment proceeding the assessee had failed to comply the notices issued by the Ld. AO. Finally, the Ld. AO completed assessment ex-parte u/s 144 with the addition amount to Rs. 68,57,385/-. The aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay for 116 days. In terms of violation of section 249(3) the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) had rejected the assessee’s condonation petition due to absence of sufficient cause for delay in filing appeal. The appeal was rejected on the ground of limitation without considering the merit of the case. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us.

The Ld. AR appeared and filed a paper book comprising pages 1 to 165 which has been placed on record. The Ld. AR contended that the assessee had submitted the condonation petition with the notarized affidavit for explain the delay in filing appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The said notarized affidavit is duly sworn by the assessee himself on dated 06.08.2024. The relevant part of the assessee’s submission is reproduced as below: “3. I was completely dependent on my chartered accountant to manage all my income tax related compliances and I was not able to personally look into the same; 4. That the case was selected for scrutiny for AY 2018-19 and all the notices received by me on the email were sent to my Chartered Accountant; 5. All the while, I was under the impression that appropriate legal action was duly being taken for the on-going matter by my appointed Chartered Accountant; 6. That I realized that the aforesaid issue was amplified on account of the negligence of my erstwhile Chartered Accountant and hence, I engaged with another Chartered Accountant Firm, HSDR & Associates and requested them to explain the case and take charge with immediate effect;

The Ld. DR argued and stands in favour of the orders of the revenue authorities but the Ld. DR had not made any strong objection against the fact narrated by the Ld. AR.

In our considered view, the assessee is a non-filer of the Income tax Return. The assessee’s case was re-opened u/s. 147 of the Act and the assessment was completed ex-parte u/s. 144 of the Act. The assessee had fully relied on his Chartered Accountant who is appearing on behalf of the assessee before the revenue authorities. So, the delay was duly occurred for non- cooperation from assessee’s Chartered Accountant. We observed that at both the stages before the revenue authorities, there was a lack of effective representation on behalf of the assesse. The appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) subsequently reflects the findings recorded in the assessment order and the Ld. CIT(A) had not considered the submission of the assessee. Considering the peculiar facts and personal hardships faced by the assessee, we are of the view that reasonable opportunity of being heard was afforded to him. Accordingly, in the interest of natural justice, we restore the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after condoning the delay in filing appeal and direct to pass a speaking order on merit. We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and issues are left completely 3 open for fresh consideration. Needless to say, the assessee shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing in set aside proceedings and any evidence short to be filed shall be considered in accordance with law. It is also directed that Ld. CIT(A) should pass a speaking order after considering the assessee’s submissions. At the same time, the assessee is directed to remain diligent and fully cooperative to ensure experience disposal of assessment proceeding.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.2713/Mum/2026 is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 31st day of July 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) (ANIKESH BANERJEE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai,िदनांक/Dated: 31/07/2026 Soumili, PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ�/The Appellant , 2. �ितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकरआयु� CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., मुंबई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड�फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar), ITAT, MUMBAI