NAGAMANI YEDIPALA,KUKATPALLY vs. ITO, WARD-1, NALGONDA

The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee had not filed her return of income for the assessment year 2020-21. The case of the assessee was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act, dated 31.03.2024, on the basis of information available with the A.O. that the assessee had sold an immovable property for a consideration of Rs.27,00,000/-. Thereafter, notices under Section 142(1) of the Act and subsequent show cause notices were issued calling for the return of income and other relevant details. Since there was no compliance from the assessee to any of the notices issued, the A.O. completed the assessment ex parte under Section

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 187 days. During the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) observed that, though there was a delay of 187 days in filing the appeal, the assessee had neither furnished any reasons explaining the delay in filing the appeal nor filed any petition seeking condonation of delay. The Ld. CIT(A) held that the assessee had failed to establish "sufficient cause" for not presenting the appeal within the time prescribed under Section 249(2) of the Act and, therefore, declined to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine without adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee on merits.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before us.

The learned Senior A.R. for the Revenue, Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, though supported the orders of the lower authorities, fairly submitted that, if the Tribunal is inclined to condone the delay in

We have heard both parties, perused the material available on record, and had gone through the orders of the authorities below. Before the A.O., the assessee remained ex parte. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the appeal was filed with a delay of 187 days. Since the assessee had not furnished any reasons explaining the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in ‘limine’. The assessee has filed a petition before the Tribunal explaining the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Upon perusal of the reasons stated in the affidavit filed before the Tribunal explaining the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), we are of the considered view that the reasons furnished by the assessee appear to be bona fide and constitute "sufficient cause" for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time. Therefore, we deem it fit to condone the delay of 187 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the

Having said so, we further noted that the assessment proceedings before the A.O. were completed ex parte and the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in ‘limine’ without adjudicating the issues on merits. We further find that, the assessee has explained that she, along with her husband, had purchased an immovable property by availing a housing loan from the bank, whereas the A.O. treated the purchase of the property as a sale transaction and computed short-term capital gains. In our considered view, the above contention requires proper verification by the A.O. after examining the relevant documentary evidence. Therefore, we deem it fit to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the A.O. for reconsideration in accordance with law after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The present appeal arises out of the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) in the penalty proceedings, consequent to the assessment order challenged by the assessee in ITA No.251/Hyd/2026. The assessee has filed the present appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeal preferred against the order passed by the A.O. levying penalty under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect of the addition made towards short-term capital gains. Once again, the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was filed with a delay of 11 days, and the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in ‘limine’ without condoning the delay. The assessee has filed a petition before the Tribunal explaining the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Upon perusal of the reasons stated in the affidavit filed before the Tribunal explaining the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), we are of the considered view that the reasons furnished by the assessee appear to be bona fide and constitute "sufficient cause" for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time. Therefore, we deem it fit to

We further noted that, since the quantum appeal filed by the assessee has been restored to the file of the A.O. for fresh adjudication, the penalty levied under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the very same addition has no legs to stand at this stage. Therefore, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the issue to the file of the A.O. with a direction to reconsider the issue of levy of penalty, if warranted, after completion of the assessment proceedings in accordance with law.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.252/Hyd/2026 is allowed for statistical purposes.