RAMCHANDRA DAJIBA DHANUSKAR,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(2), NAGPUR

Registry has pointed out that there is delay of 151 days in filing of the appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the cause of delay and the contents reads as follows:

After hearing both the sides and having gone through the reasons for delay, I am satisfied that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee to file the appeal within the stipulated time. I note that the delay is not intentional and assessee would not have gained from filing the appeal with a delay. I therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 462 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal being barred by limitation as the assessee filed the appeal with delay of 126 days. Assessee has demonstrated that the same has arisen due to ‘reasonable cause’ and that the assessee was passing through medical issues. Only request is made to condone the delay before ld.CIT(A) and giving one more opportunity to go before ld.CIT(A) for adjudication of the issues on merit. Ld. DR did not object to the request made by ld. Counsel for the assessee.

I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. I note that the assessee is an individual and assessment has been concluded u/s.147 of the Act for A.Y. 2013-14 assessing the income at Rs.7,03,790/- which includes the addition for unexplained investment at Rs.5.00 lakh which the assessee has challenged before ld.CIT(A). The alleged investment has been made with Wasankar Wealth Management Ltd. Assessee made detailed submissions before ld.CIT(A) but the appeal filed before ld.CIT(A) is delayed by 126 days. Ld.CIT(A) has not condoned the delay. On going through the submissions filed by the assessee before ld.CIT(A) explaining the reasons for delay, I am satisfied that due to medical problems faced by the asseseee there was delay in filing of appeal. Considering the ‘reasonable cause’, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to condone the delay. I therefore condone the delay in view of settled judicial precedents referred above.

Since ld.CIT(A) has not decided the issues raised in the three appeals on merits, considering the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee and in the larger interest of justice, I deem it proper to restore the issues on merits back to the file ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. In view thereof, without dwelling into merits of the issue, the issues raised in the instant appeal are being remitted to the file of ld.CIT(A). Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and consider the documents/evidences to be filed by the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is directed to update email and contact details on the ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Findings of the CIT(A)/NFAC are set aside and Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

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

The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, न गपुर SMC बेंच, 4. न गपुर / DR, ITAT, “Nagpur SMC Bench, Nagpur ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,