MURUGESAN SUNDARAMBAL,PUDUKKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD-1,, PUDUKKOTTAI

There is a delay of 23 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee has filed an affidavit seeking condonation of the delay, explaining the reasons for the same. It is submitted that the assessee has limited formal education and does not have the ability to independently handle the income-tax proceedings or e- proceedings. It is further submitted that the assessee’s son has been assisting in managing the income-tax matters and email communications, as the notices and orders issued by the Income Tax Department are received through his registered email ID on the Income Tax Portal. The assessee’s son is presently pursuing his studies away from home and, due to his academic commitments, could not notice the communication immediately upon receipt. Consequently, the assessee was unaware of the order passed by the CIT(A) within the prescribed period for filing the appeal before the Tribunal. It is submitted that immediately upon becoming aware of the impugned order, the assessee consulted a tax professional and filed the present appeal before the Tribunal without any further delay. On perusal of the reasons stated, we are of the view that no latches can be attributed to the assessee as there is sufficient cause for belated filing of this appeal. Hence, we condone the delay and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits.

At the very outset, we notice that the order of First Appellate Authority (FAA) is ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to three notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. Further, we also note that the assessment has been completed on best judgment basis r.w.s.147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s.144B of the Act.

The Ld. AR submitted that the three notices dated 12.11.2025, 20.11.2025 and 27.11.2025 issued by the First Appellate Authority were all within a short span of one month. It was submitted that the notices were sent to the e-mail ID of the assessee’s son, who has been assisting the assessee in handling income-tax matters and electronic communications. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee’s son is presently pursuing his studies away from home and, due to his academic commitments, could not notice the communications immediately upon receipt. Consequently, the assessee was unaware of the hearing notices issued by the FAA and therefore could not appear before the appellate authority, resulting in the appeal being disposed of ex-parte. It was further submitted that the assessment had been completed on a best judgment basis. The Ld. AR, therefore, pleaded that one more opportunity may be

The Ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the FAA & AO and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was submitted that the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. It is an admitted fact that the proceedings before the AO as well as the FAA were completed ex-parte, since the assessee failed to respond to the various statutory notices issued by the Income-tax authorities. The Ld. AR submitted before us that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from effectively participating in the proceedings and pleaded that one more opportunity may be granted to represent the case before the AO. The Ld. AR also undertook that the assessee would duly appear before the AO and furnish all necessary details and evidences as and when called for. Though, we strongly deprecate the casual and nonchalant approach of the assessee in not responding to the statutory notices issued by the AO & FAA, however, considering the submissions of the Ld. AR and in the interest of justice and fair play,

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