SURESH BABU NAINAPPA,TIRUPATI vs. ITO, WARD -1(1), TIRUPATI

The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

At the time of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has submitted that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine being barred by limitation and declined to condone the delay of 99 days in filing the appeal. He has submitted that the assessee has explained the cause of delay in Form-35 which is also reproduced by the learned CIT(A) in Para no.2.7 of the impugned order. Thus, the learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has submitted that the assessee being an individual and offered the income under the Head “Capital Gain” was solely depending on the Tax Consultant however, due to lack of knowledge of filing the appeal the Tax Consultant could not take immediate steps for filing the appeal and therefore, the assessee approached Chartered Accountant for filing the appeal. Therefore, in this process there is a delay of 99 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has further contended that in the remote areas poor assessees’ are depending highly on the Tax Practitioners and therefore, there is no deliberate delay on the part of the assessee in filing the appeal, but it was due to the reasons which were beyond the control of the assessee. He has further submitted that the Assessing Officer has made adhoc disallowance in respect of the claim of cost of construction/ improvement of the property while computing the capital gain and therefore, the appeal of the assessee ought to have been decided on merits by the learned CIT(A). He has pointed out that the assessee has responded to the notice issued by the learned CIT(A) and filed the written submissions as well as supporting evidence vide acknowledgment dated 08.08.2025 however, the learned CIT(A) has not considered the reply as well as the relevant details and evidence filed by the assessee. Thus, he has submitted that the delay of 99 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) may be condoned and matter may be remanded to the record of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

On the other hand, the learned DR has vehemently objected to the condonation of delay and submitted that the learned CIT(A) has clearly given a finding that the reasons explained by the assessee are not a sufficient cause within the meaning of sec.249 of the Act. The assessee has just taken a plea of lapse on the part of the Tax Consultant without any supporting material to show that the Tax Consultant failed to perform his professional duty. He has relied upon the Orders of the authorities below.

We have considered the rival submissions as well as carefully perused the reasons explained by the assessee for delay of 99 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) which are reproduced in Para no.2.7 of the impugned order as under:

Since the assessee belongs to Tirupati a remote area and stated that the Tax Consultant was having the access to the assesses account in the Income Tax Portal has not taken requisite steps in filing the appeal due to lack of his knowledge. Further, the assessee being an individual and declared income only under the Head “Capital Gain” on account of sale of property therefore, the reasons explained by the assessee has to be considered liberally. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we take a lenient view to condone the delay of 99 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) subject to cost of Rs.2,500/- [Rs. Two Thousand Five Hundred Only] to be paid to The ITAT Tax Bar Association, Hyderabad, within a period of one month from the date of this order and appeal of the assessee is admitted for adjudication on merits.

Since the learned CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assessee on merits and the same was dismissed in limine being barred by limitation therefore, in view of the matter that we have condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) the matter requires to be decided on merits at the level of the learned CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is remanded to the record of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication of the appeal of the assessee on merits after giving a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

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