REKHABEN ASHOKKUMAR BUDHDEV,BARDOLI vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(4), SURAT

There was delay of 168 days in filing of this appeal. The assessee has filed a condonation application along with an affidavit explaining the reason for delay. It has been submitted that the notice for hearing was issued by the CIT(A) on e-mail ID which was different from the one mentioned in Form 35. As a result, the assessee was neither aware of the proceeding undergoing before the CIT(A) nor the order of the CIT(A) was received on the designated email ID. Further a physical copy of the order was also not received. The assessee came to know about the order of CIT(A) only after the notice for recovery of demand was received on 02.12.2025 and thereafter the present appeal was immediately filed. In the process there was delay of 168 days. Considering the explanation of the assessee, the delay in filing of the appeal is condoned.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed return of income for A.Y 2020-21 on 10.01.2021, declaring total income of Rs.4,26,480/- and agricultural income of Rs.7,77,720/-. Thereafter, a revised return was filed on 31.05.2021 showing total income of Rs.4,14,520 and agricultural income of Rs. 26,59,269/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. In the course of assessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the agricultural income as disclosed by the assessee. After examining the landholding and the expenses incurred for the purpose of agriculture, the AO treated the agricultural income to the extent of Rs.10,11,996/- as income from other source. The assessment was completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act on Rekhaben Ashokkumar Budhdev Vs. ITO, Asst. Year : 2020-21 - 3–

2022 at a total income of Rs.14,26,516/- and agricultural income of Rs. 16,47,273/-.

Aggrieved with the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee had filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority which was decided by the Ld. CIT(A) vide the impugned order and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed.

Now the assessee is second appeal before us. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

We have considered the request of the assessee. It transpires that the Ld. CIT(A) did not send the notices to the assessee on the email ID as mentioned in Form No.-35 but on a different email ID. As a result, the assessee could not make any compliance before him and the matter was not adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) on merits. In the interest of justice, we deem it proper to set aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction allow another opportunity to the assessee for making compliance. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed send notices to the assessee on email ID as mentioned in Form Rekhaben Ashokkumar Budhdev Vs. ITO, Asst. Year : 2020-21 - 5–

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

""यथ" / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु"(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Surat 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file.