LATE SATHURAPPA NAICKER NARAYANASAMY, L/R. BY K. SARASWATHI,TIRUNELVELI vs. ITO, WARD-1, , TIRUNELVELI
आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,‘सी’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ के, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी जगदȣश, लेखा सदèय के सम¢
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENTAND
SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 1747/CHNY/2025
िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2017-18
Late Sathurappa Naicker
Narayansamy,
(Rep. by Legal Rep. Smt.
K.Saraswathi),
2/36, Sevalkulam Post,
Sankarankovil Taluk,
Tirunelveli – 627 754. PAN: ABBPN 7889G
Vs.
The Income Tax Officer,
Ward-1,
Tirunelveli.
(अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant)
(ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent)
अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri G. Seetharaman, CA
ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Smt. Anitha, Addl. CIT
सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25.08.2025
घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025
आदेश /O R D E R
PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Addl/JCIT(A)-5, Mumbai dated 30.04.2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 353 days in filing the appeal. The appeal ought to have been filed before ITAT on or before 29.06.2024. However, the appeal was filed belatedly on 18.06.2025. The legal heir of the assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay supported by affidavit stating there in the reasons for belated filing of this appeal. The reasons stated is that due to sudden demise of assessee, the assessee’
spouse (legal representative) was unaware of the status and developments of income tax matter of her husband. She came to know about the order passed only on receipt of show-cause notice for imposing penalty u/s.271F of the Act, on 19.04.2025. Later the appeal papers were prepared and filed before the Tribunal on 18.06.2025 with delay. On perusal of the reason stated for condonation of delay, we find there is sufficient cause for the delay in filing this appeal and no latches can be attributed to the assessee. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits.
At the very outset, we notice that the order passed by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) is ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to seven notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. Further, we also notice that the assessment has been completed on best judgment assessment u/s.144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 4. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee is from a village and he is not proficient with computer and checking of e-mails. Therefore, during the assessment proceedings, the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the AO. The Ld.AR submitted that initially the assessee has not filed his return of income. However, the assessee had filed his return of income on 12.11.2019 before completion of assessment. However, the AO had completed the assessment on best judgment basis without considering the return of income filed by the assessee. The Ld.AR for the assessee further submitted that that the assessee was passed away during the appellate proceedings. The assessee's spouse who is the legal heir of assessee is a senior citizen and was unaware of her husband’s income-tax proceedings. Therefore, the order passed by the FAA is also ex-parte. She came to know about the order passed by the FAA only on receipt of show-cause notice for imposing penalty u/s.271F of the Act, on 19.04.2025. Hence, it was prayed in the interest of justice and equity, the issue may be restored to the files of the AO as a last opportunity for proper representation of his case.
The Ld. DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the AO and the FAA and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was prayed the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed. 6. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The proceedings before the AO as well as the FAA was ex- parte, since the assessee did not respond to various notices issued. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee was passed away during the appellate proceedings.The assessee's spouse, who is the legal heir was unaware of the income-tax proceedings and did not take note of the notices issued by the FAA to assessee’s e-mail. In light of the submissions of Ld.AR and in the interest of justice and fair play, the matter is remitted to the files of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26th August, 2025 at Chennai. (जगदȣश)
(JAGADISH)
लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
(जॉज[ जॉज[ के)
(GEORGE GEORGE K)
उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT
चेÛनई/Chennai,
Ǒदनांक/Dated, the 26th August, 2025
RSR
आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to:
अपीलाथȸ/Appellant
Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Madurai 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF.