SMT. PRABHA SHAMSUNDAR,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(5), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3356/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 October 2026AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The Tribunal noted the assessee's age, her lack of business income, the circumstances surrounding the service of notices (incorrect address, deceased spouse's email), and the affidavit evidence. It was held that the delay was not intentional and there existed a 'reasonable cause' for not filing the appeal within the stipulated time. The Tribunal adopted a 'justice-oriented approach' and relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. and Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. Consequently, the impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the issues were restored to the file of the CIT(A) for necessary adjudication after affording the assessee an opportunity of being heard. The assessee was directed to provide updated contact details and remain vigilant. The effective grounds of appeal were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Smt. Prabha Shamsundar, is a 72-year-old woman who has never conducted business or had taxable income. The appeal before the ITAT pertains to Assessment Year 2012-13. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a significant delay, which the CIT(A) did not condone. The Assessing Officer had initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147, alleging that the assessee made time deposits of Rs. 10,77,181/-. Notices under Section 148 and 142(1) were allegedly sent to an incorrect address, and email notices were sent to the assessee's deceased spouse. The assessee claims to have learned of the order only on 24.10.2024. The ITAT is considering the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

1. Whether there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2012-13, thereby warranting condonation of delay? (Question of fact and law, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that she is an elderly woman with no business income. There was a significant delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) due to 'reasonable cause' preventing timely filing. Notices under Section 148 and 142(1) were sent to an address where she never resided. Email notices were sent to her deceased spouse's email ID. She only became aware of the order on 24.10.2024. The assessee prayed for condonation of delay and setting aside the matter to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue supported the order of the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “SMC BENCH”, PUNE

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Shri Vaibhav Ruikar (virtual)
For Respondent: Dr. Amit Munde
Hearing: 25.08.2026Pronounced: 14.10.2026

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 is directed against the order dated 07.10.2025 of NFAC, Delhi emanating out of Assessment Order dated 09.12.2019 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee is a 72 years old woman and never carried any business or profession and never had taxable income during her life time. There is a huge delay in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A) which has not been condoned despite ‘reasonable cause’ preventing the assessee to file the appeal within the stipulated time. He further submitted so far as physical notices are concerned, notice u/s.148, 142(1) have been sent on the address in which the assessee has never resided. So far as notices sent on email, it has been sent on the email id of her spouse, who passed away on 26.03.2025. She came to know of passing of the order only on 24.10.2024 upon continuous follows up by the Tax Consultant.

2 Smt. Prabha Shamsunder

Considering the above reasons, ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed for condoning the delay before ld.CIT(A) and set aside the issues to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication, in the interest of justice.

3.

Ld. DR on the other hand supported the order of ld.CIT(A).

4.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before me. I note that the assessee and has not filed the return of income for the year under consideration. Case of the assessee reopened based on the information that assessee has made Time deposits of Rs. 10,77,181/-. Notices u/s. 148 and 144 of the Act were served on the assessee and in absence of any compliance made thereof, Id. Assessing Officer concluded the Best Judgment assessment making addition of the said sum as unexplained income u/s.69A of the Act. In appeal, Id.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as there is a huge delay in filing the appeal and the assessee could not be explain the delay with sufficient cause backed by any evidence.

5.

In this regard, I have carefully gone through the averments made in the written submissions, age of the assessee, facts demonstrated by the Id. Counsel for the assessee and the Affidavits filed the Tax Consultant as well as the representative of the assessee and I am of the view that delay in filing of the appeal before Id.CIT(A) is not intentional and there exists 'reasonable cause' for not filing the appeal within the time limit. I therefore adopting pedantic and justice oriented approach condone the said delay in filing of appeal before Id.CIT(A) 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. 3 Smt. Prabha Shamsunder

6.

In view thereof, without dwelling upon the merits of the case, I set aside the impugned order and restore the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of Id.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication after affording due opportunity to the assessee. Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

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

Order pronounced on this 14th day of October, 2026. (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ंक / Dated : 14th October, 2026. Satish

4 Smt. Prabha Shamsunder

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to :

अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.

2.3.

The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “SMC” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, Sunil Kumar More More Date: 2026.10.24 16:35:28 +05'30' ////

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →