Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee passed away during appellate proceedings, and his legal heir (wife) was unaware of the pending tax proceedings. She became aware of the demand only in May 2025 and then contacted the tax consultant to file the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the significant delay in filing the appeal due to the assessee's death and the legal heir's lack of knowledge about the proceedings. The appeal was remitted to the AO for fresh adjudication to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned due to the assessee's death and the legal heir's unawareness of proceedings? Whether the ex-parte assessment and order should be set aside and the matter remitted to the AO for fresh adjudication?
Sections Cited
250, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KAND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA
आदेश /O R D E R
PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT:
This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National SA No.55/CHNY/2025 Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 13.09.2023, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2017-18.
There is a delay of 536 days in filing this appeal. The Legal heir and wife of the assessee has filed a condonation petition supported by the affidavit. The reasons stated in the condonation petition by the legal heir and wife of assessee for belated filing is that, the assessee passed away during the appellate proceedings i.e., on 11.05.2021 (Copy of death certificate has been filed along with the condonation petition). It was stated that the assessee’s wife was unaware of the tax proceedings pending with respect of the assessee. Only during the first week of May, 2025 when the assessee’s wife received a call from the AO regarding outstanding demand, she came to know about the pending income-tax proceedings. Subsequently, she contacted her tax consultant and took steps to file appeal before the Tribunal. It was stated that the assessee’s wife had no knowledge about income tax matters nor she had occasion to access her husband’s emails. Therefore, it was submitted that the delay was not intentional and entirely due to the genuine cause. On perusal of the reasons stated, we find there is sufficient reasons for delay in
At the very outset, we notice that the CIT(A)’s order is ex- parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to the various notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. Further, we also note that the assessment has been completed on best judgment basis u/s.144 of the Act.
The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee had passed away on 11.05.2021. Therefore, the hearing notices sent from the office of the First Appellate Authority to the email address of the assessee were not noticed by the assessee’s wife. The assessee’s wife was unaware of the tax proceedings pending with respect of the assessee. Only during the first week of May, 2025 when the assessee’s wife received a call from the AO regarding outstanding demand, she came to know about the pending income-tax proceedings. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessment has been completed on best judgment basis u/s.144 of the Act. Therefore, it was prayed in the interest of justice and equity, the
The Ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the AO and the CIT(A) and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was prayed the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The proceedings before the AO as well as the CIT(A) was ex-parte, since the assessee did not respond to various notices issued. We note that the assessee had passed away during the appellate proceedings and the assessee’s wife is not aware of the pending proceedings resulted in non-appearance during the appellate proceedings. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the view that the matter ought to be restored to the files of the AO. Accordingly, 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 and the stay petition filed by the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11th June, 2025 at Chennai.