JYOTIMA SINGH,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), GURGAON , GURGAON

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘E’ : NEW DELHI)

BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No. 7390/Del/2025 Asstt. Year : 2020-21

JYOTIMA SINGH, VS. ITO, Ward-2(2), C/O TEJ MOHAN SINGH, GURGAON ADVOCATE, # 527, SECTOR-10-D, CHANDIGARH (PAN: FBDPS6709D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Tej Mohan Singh, Adv. Respondent by : Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 23.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement 03.07.2026

ORDER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal by the assessee is emanating from the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in appeal No. NFAC/2019-20/10439425 dated 28.10.2025. Assessment was framed by the AO u/s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 20.09.2022 relating to assessment year 2020-21. 2. After hearing rival contentions and perusing the records, we find that in this case, AO has passed the exparte order u/s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act and there was a delay of 862 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who did not condone the delay in dispute and dismissed the appeal as non-maintainable and also upheld the addition made by the AO, even without going into the merits of the case. We note that before us, Ld. AR has submitted that Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee merely on the ground that delay in filing the appeal, without appreciating that the delay was duly explained and was on account reasonable and bonafide circumstances beyond the control

of the assessee. It was further submitted that assessee had never been served with the order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B due to email ID and mobile number of the earlier counsel, who after taking the professional fee from the assessee, without information to assessee left the interest from the assessee’s taxation matter, as a result, thereof the delay occurred in filing the appeal. It is further submitted that the assessee being the lady nor conversant to open the e-portal, thus, she was not aware of the passing of the assessment order. It is also submitted that assessee only came to know the matter when Inspector of the Income Tax Department visited the assessee’s place and handover the demand notice to the assessee and thereafter immediately assessee contacted with another Sr. Advocate, who advised to file the appeal and then the belated appeal of the assessee was filed with the Ld. First Appellate Authority. Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below. In view of above, we are of the considered view that there existed a reasonable cause for non-compliance on the part of the assessee. Keeping in view the aforesaid factual matrix and in the interest of justice, we condone the delay in dispute before the CIT(A), and accordingly, restore back the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee by passing a speaking order, in accordance with law. 3. In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 03.07.2026. Sd/- Sd/-

(MANISH AGARWAL) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT

Date: 03.07.2026 SRBhatnaggar Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. DIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT By Order,

Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Bench

2 | P a g e