KANAPPAN KRISHNAN,KRISHNAGIRI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KRISHNAGIRI

There is a delay of 135 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee has filed an affidavit seeking condonation of delay and explaining the reasons therefor. It is submitted that the assessee sustained a spinal injury in a major accident in 2025 and underwent prolonged medical treatment. The doctor had advised the assessee to take rest for an extended period. Consequently, the assessee was unable to attend to his day-to-day affairs. It was further submitted that the assessee was not conversant with technology or faceless appellate proceedings and, therefore, could not effectively monitor the notices issued by the First Appellate Authority or the passing of the impugned order. 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 five 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.144 r.w.s 147 of the Act.

The Ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the FAA & AO and there is no violation of principles of

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The proceedings before the AO as well as the FAA were ex-parte, as the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by both authorities. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee was unfamiliar with the online proceedings and, consequently, was unaware of the hearing notices and the order passed by the FAA. The Ld. AR further submitted that the notices issued by the AO were served at the assessee’s lorry booking office, where the staff could not understand their contents. It was further submitted that the assessee became aware of the reassessment proceedings only towards the fag end and that the AO passed the assessment order ex-parte without considering his request for time to furnish the requisite details. He, therefore, pleaded for one more opportunity to represent his case before the AO and undertook to duly comply with the notices and furnish all requisite details and evidences. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the statutory notices issued by the FAA & AO. However, considering the submissions of the Ld. AR and in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the view that the matter ought to be restored to the files of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The

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