GIRIJA RATHORE,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 1(3), JPR, JAIPUR

Proceedings under section 148A were initiated in my case for Assessment Year 2018-19 and an assessment order was subsequently passed under section 147 read with section 144B on 17.02.2023. 3. Immediately upon receipt of notices from the Income Tax Department, I handed over all documents relating to the property transaction including purchase deed, sale deed, bank statements and other supporting records to the tax consultant handling my income-tax matters.

The return filed in response to notice under section 148 was prepared on the basis of documents and information supplied by me.

I had disclosed all material facts relating to the transaction and had not concealed any information either from the consultant or from the Department.

I am a senior citizen and possess limited technical knowledge of income-tax law and appellate procedures and therefore remained dependent upon professional assistance.

I bona fide believed that necessary compliances and appellate remedies were being properly handled.

During preparation of the present appeal, I discovered that while preparing the capital gain computation an inadvertent computational mistake had occurred whereby an indexed figure was again subjected to indexation resulting in an incorrect computation.

The mistake was purely inadvertent and occurred despite complete disclosure of all primary facts.

The assessment records themselves establish that the property transaction was disclosed before the Department.

The delay in filing appeal before the learned CIT(A) occurred due to bona fide reliance upon professional assistance and was neither deliberate nor intentional.

No benefit accrued to me by such delay.

Upon obtaining complete records and proper advice, I immediately pursued the available appellate remedies.

I have a strong and bona fide case on merits including the claim under section 54F and deduction claimed under Chapter VI-A towards repayment of housing loan principal.

Though the housing loan account has since been closed and a repayment certificate is presently unavailable, the housing loan sanction agreement, purchase deed and related records establish the genuineness of the claim.

No prejudice shall be caused to the Revenue if the matter is adjudicated on merits, whereas refusal would result in substantial injustice.”

1 Therefore, Ld. Counsel requested to condone the delay and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for passing the order afresh on merits of the case.

Per contra, Ld. DR for the Revenue supported the orders passed by the lower authorities.

Heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Since the assessee has now explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal by way of notarized affidavit, we deem it fit to set aside the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee and to consider the notarized affidavit filed by the assessee and then pass fresh order in accordance with the provisions of law. Needless to say the assessee should cooperate by filing all the required documents before the Ld. CIT(A) for passing the order on merits of the case.

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