SHOBHADEVI LR OF LATE RACHAPPA DHANURKAR,BASAVAKALYANI vs. JOINT COMMISSSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE, GULBARGA

Briefly stated facts of the case are as per the information available it was noticed that assessee has deposited some cash during demonetization period during the Financial Year 2016-17. Upon verification it is learnt that assessee has sold the immoveable property during Assessment Year 2017-18 and

On being aggrieved by the Order of the learned AO, the assessee filed appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) observed that there is a delay of 94 days for which no sufficient cause was explained by the assessee and dismissed appeal of the assessee.

On being aggrieved by the Order of the learned CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before us. The only issue is with regard to levy of penalty under section 271D of the Act. On this issue, the learned Authorized Representative [in short “AR”] argued that the learned CIT(A) has not adjudicated the appeal on merits by condoning the delay of 94 days before him. He further submitted that the penalty order was dated 21.01.2022 and the assessee filed appeal before learned CIT(A) on 24.05.2022. He further submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court excluded the limitation period upto 28.02.2022 due to covid pandemic. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has provided 90 days from 01.03.2022, where the limitation period falls within the period of limitation allowed vide the Misc. Application No. 21 of 2022 in suo moto Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020. He,

Per contra, the learned Departmental Representative (in short "DR") relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessee has not filed his return of income and has received cash amounting to Rs. 10 lakhs on the sale of immoveable property. The learned CIT(A) however did not condone the delay of 94 days in filing the appeal before him and has also not adjudicated the case on merits. Since the delay is partly covered by the covid period and the extension allowed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India for a period of 90 days, we consider it fit to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for adjudicating the issue on merits by providing one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Since the matter has been remanded back to the learned CIT(A), other grounds are left open.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.