BABU LAKSHMI,KANCHIPURAM vs. ITO, NCW-22(1), TAMBARAM

At the outset, it is noted that the assessee preferred an appeal against the order dated 09.03.2024 passed by the AO under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"), inter alia, making additions on account of unexplained money under

Ld. AR, Ms. Nikitha, Advocate, submits that the AY is the latest and no prejudice will be caused to the Revenue if this Tribunal directs the ld. CIT(A) to consider the delay condonation petition for condoning the delay. Otherwise, the assessee will be put to irreparable loss and hardship on account of the addition made by the AO under section 69 of the Act.

Ld. DR, Mr. Manoj Prakash, JCIT, vehemently opposed the same.

After hearing both the parties and in view of the nature of the evidence, we are of the considered opinion that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee, as the assessee is ready to prosecute her case with all material evidence. We find force in the argument of the ld. AR that, the assessment being the latest, no prejudice will be caused if this Tribunal affords one more opportunity to the assessee by remanding the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice, we direct the ld. CIT(A) to consider the delay condonation petition and condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the issues on merits. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of her claim and shall represent her case before the ld. CIT(A) without fail. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes