Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was dismissed ex parte. The assessee contended that insufficient time was granted for compliance and that reasonable cause, due to the serious illness and subsequent death of his mother, prevented him from responding to hearing notices. He was engaged in medical care and funeral rites for his mother.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged that the assessee could not represent his case before the CIT(A)/NFAC and accepted the grounds presented, including the affidavit and death certificate regarding his mother's passing. In the interest of justice and fair play, the Tribunal decided to remit the issue back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh decision.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC erred in passing an ex parte order without granting sufficient opportunity, considering the assessee's reasonable cause for non-compliance due to family medical emergency and bereavement.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY
PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 21/08/2025 vide DIN and order no: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1079814889(1) passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) for the AY 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - 1. The impugned order u/s. 250 of the Act dated 21/08/2025 passed by the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi is opposed to law, facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in dismissing the appeal by passing an ex parte appellate order dated 21/08/2025 by without granting sufficient time.
ITA No.2343/Bang/2025 Murali Reddy Machireddy, Bengaluru Page 2 of 3 3. The ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in holding that the assessee has not responded to the hearing notices dated 17/06/2025, 27/06/2025 & 07/07/2025 without appreciating the fact that the aggregate time granted for compliance was only 19 days. 4. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing ex-parte appellate order without appreciating the fact that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause on account of the medical care had to be taken of his mother who ultimately passed away on 13/06/2025 and thereafter the assessee had engaged in performing funeral rights as result of which the assessee had not concentrated on the alleged hearing notices. 5. The ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee not interested to pursue his appeal without appreci8ating the fact that the alleged non-compliance of hearing notice was neither intentional nor deliberate and except for the Bonafide reasons of serious ill-health of the mother. 6. Without prejudice to the Ground No.2 to 5 it is urged that the ld. CIT(A) has not passed the appellate order on merits of the case. 7. The apellant5 craved leave to add, alter, amend and delete any of the grounds at the time of hearing.
Before us, both the parties fairly conceded that the assessee could not represent his case before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Before us, the ld. A.R. of the assessee vehemently submitted that ld. CIT(A)/NFAC had not granted sufficient opportunity for filing written submissions with supporting documents and granted only 19 days’ time for all the three notices taken together. Further, ld. A.R. of the assessee filed an affidavit along with the death certificate of the
ITA No.2343/Bang/2025 Murali Reddy Machireddy, Bengaluru Page 3 of 3 mother of the assessee and submitted that the assessee could not represent his case as the assessee was engaged in providing the medical care to his mother who was seriously ill and in due course passed away on 13/06/2025. This being so, in the interest of justice, equity and fair play, we deemed it fit and proper to remit the entire issues in dispute to the file of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to decide afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say, reasonable opportunity of being heard must be granted to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to produce all the necessary documents/ records/ evidences in order to substantiate his claim. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21st Apr, 2026
Sd/- Sd/- (Prashant Maharishi) (Keshav Dubey) Vice President Judicial Member
Bangalore, Dated 21st Apr, 2026. VG/SPS
Copy to:
The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 5 Guard file By order
Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore.