Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) which was delayed by 693 days. The delay was attributed to the assessee's severe health issues, lack of knowledge of tax laws, and negligence of previous tax consultants.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, admitted it for adjudication, and found that the matter deserved to be remanded back to the AO for fresh assessment to provide the assessee an opportunity to present their case.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned due to the assessee's health issues and professional negligence, and whether the matter should be remanded for fresh assessment.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 148, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B”NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI
आदेश /O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
The present appeal is found to be delayed by 693 days for which the assessee has filed an affidavit requesting for condonation of delay as under: -
“During Appellate proceeding: d. That the Order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) was ex-parte on 12.09.2023 against which the appellant is in appeal before your honors. e. That the Appellant has been suffering from some severe diseases since 2013 and owing to his medical condition, he needs to regularly visit hospitals and get hospitalized at least once in a month. f. Furthermore, the appellant is senior citizen and is not so well versed with Income tax laws, rules and regulations. Due to his health issues, he was not in such condition to access his mail ID and respond to the hearing notices issued by Income Tax Department. g. Further, the previous Authorized representative (AR) of the appellant has registered his email address as secondary email ID in the profile of the appellant on Income Tax Portal. He neither supported the appellant in appellate proceedings nor he informed the appellant about passing of ex- parte order by the Ld. CIT(A). h. That on receipt of the order passed by Ld. CIT(A), the Appellant became aware that the order had been passed ex-parte on 12.09.2023. To the Appellant's surprise, the order was issued without the Appellant's knowledge, and this information was not communicated by the former tax consultant. i. Thereafter, the appellant engaged a new consultant to pursue the appellate proceedings. Unfortunately, the appellant faced further hardship as the new consultant accepted fees but only deposited the appeal fees in January 2024 without actually filing the appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT. j. Due to lack of knowledge about income tax laws and appellate proceedings, the appellant placed complete trust in the said consultant. During this period, the appellant was frequently hospitalized, which hindered his ability to effectively coordinate with the consultant. k. Thereafter, when the appellant's health improved, he made multiple attempts to contact the consultant to inquire about the status of the appellate matter. Despite several efforts, there was no response from the consultant to calls or messages.
1. That Your Honor will appreciate that the Appellant is not well-versed in income tax laws and related proceedings and having placed good faith in the consultants engaged, suffered due to their negligence and inaction.
That Your Honor will also appreciate the ex-parte orders passed by the Ld. AO and the Ld. CIT(A) were not a result of any willful default or mala fide intention on the part of the appellant but were caused by factors genuinely beyond his control, including serious health issues and misguidance by the professionals entrusted with the matter.
3. In light of the above, the Appellant humbly prays that the matter may kindly be referred back to the Ld. Assessing Officer for re-adjudication, allowing the Appellant an opportunity to present their case and furnish necessary evidences. I, Satish Chand Tyagi, the Appellant, do hereby verify that the contents of this affidavit as mentioned above are true and correct to my knowledge and belief. Nopart of it is false and nothing material has been concealed there from.” 1.1 Considering the reasons given in the said affidavit, the delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. This 2 appeal arises from order dated 12.09.2023, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC.
2. It is seen that before both of the lower authorities the assessee could not make any presentation of facts mainly for the reasons given in the affidavit extracted (supra). The Ld. AR prayed for one more chance to present the facts before the Ld. AO.
2.1 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below and stated that there would be no objection in case the matter was to be remanded back.
We have considered the documents before us and heard the Ld. AR/DR. We find that in the interest of substantive justice, this matter deserves to be remanded back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment.
To this extent, we set aside the impugned order and accept that the Ld. AO would give ample opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee would avail of such opportunities to present the facts.
In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11.03.2026