GANGARAPU UMA MAHESWARI,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 7(3), CHENNAI

We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 223 days. The assessee filed an affidavit accompanied by a petition explaining the reasons. On perusal of the same and upon hearing both the parties, we find that the reasons explained by the assessee are bona fide, which really prevented the assessee from filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay of 223 days is condoned

At the outset, it is noted that the AO completed the assessment by determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.86,01,024/- as against the returned income of Rs.13,78,520/-, inter alia, making an addition on account of interest from land acquisition, vide his order dated 30.01.2025, passed under Section 143 read with Section 144B of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), wherein the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO ex parte of assessee.

The Ld. AR Mr. T. Vasudevan, Advocate prayed for one more opportunity, submitting that the assessee is ready to furnish all relevant documents before the Ld. CIT(A) in support of the claim.

The Ld. DR, Ms. Anshu Sharawat, Addl. CIT, reported no objection.

After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the impugned order, particularly Para 6 thereof, we note that the Ld. CIT(A) issued six notices, but no compliance whatsoever was made by the assessee. In the absence of any compliance, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO on account of interest from land acquisition. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of his claim. Thus, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside, and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.