Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee sold an immovable property but failed to disclose the capital gain in her ITR for AY 2012-13. Consequently, an ex-parte assessment order was passed by the AO under Section 144. The CIT(A) also dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to the assessee's non-participation, leading to a delay in filing the appeal to the Tribunal, which was condoned.
Held
The Tribunal, noting the ex-parte orders by both the AO and CIT(A), set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back to the AO. The AO was directed to frame a fresh assessment de novo, providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to present her case. The assessee was also directed to be diligent in responding to future notices.
Key Issues
The core issue was the validity of ex-parte assessment and appellate orders passed due to the assessee's non-participation, and whether to grant a fresh opportunity for assessment.
Sections Cited
148, 144, 44AD, 271(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA
आदेश /O R D E R
PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal by the assessee is filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2012-13, dated 27.09.2023.
At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 431 days in appeal filed by the assessee, for which the assessee has filed an affidavit along with petition for condonation of delay in filing the appeal stating the reasons for delay,
:-2-: ITA. No.:360/Chny/2025 wherein, it is submitted that due to non-service of the CIT(A) order dated 27.09.2023 on the registered email ID of the assessee viz., kkanagaraj67@gmail.com, the assessee was not aware of the passing of the CIT(A) order and realised it only much later after some notices u/s.271(1)(c) were received on the same email ID, after which the assessee’s tax representative accessed the IT portal and found the CIT(A) order uploaded. Further, due to the suffering of both the assessee and her husband for a long time with multiple health issues, before and after the ld.CIT(A) order dated 27.09.2023. Therefore, the assessee didn’t respond to the notice issued by the CIT(A). After considering the Affidavit filed by the assessee and also hearing both the parties, we find that there is a reasonable cause for the assessee in not filing appeal on or before the due date prescribed under the law and thus, in the interests of justice, we condone delay in filing of appeal and admit the appeal filed by the assessee for adjudication.
Brief facts are that the assessee is an individual and had filed her return of income for the Assessment Year 2012-13 on 24.07.2012 declaring total income of Rs.4,28,259/-. As per the information available with the department it was noticed that the assessee had sold immovable property for a sale consideration of Rs.40,00,000/-. While filing the return for Assessment Year 2012-13, the assessee had neither admitted the sale transaction nor claimed any exemption from capital gain arising. In view of this, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued for filing the return. But the assessee neither filed the return of income in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act nor filed any submissions during the reassessment proceedings. Hence, an exparte order u/s.144 of the Act dated 24.12.2019 was passed by the AO by rejecting the :-3-: ITA. No.:360/Chny/2025 income declared under Section 44AD of the Act and treated the sale of immovable property liable for long term capital gain by allowing the deduction of cost of acquisition with Cost inflation index. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT (A).
Before the ld.CIT(A) also, the assessee has neither filed written submissions nor filed any documentary evidence in support of his claim to the notice of hearing issued. Therefore, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by confirming the order of the ld. Assessing Officer by passing an order dated 27.09.2023. Aggrieved by the order of CIT (A), the assessee has filed appeal before us.
The ld.AR for the assessee stated that the ld.CIT(A) passed an order without the participation of the assessee and similarly the AO also has passed an order u/s.144 of the Act and hence prayed for one more opportunity before the AO to prosecute the assessee’s appeal in interest of justice. Further, the ld.AR filed an Affidavit by giving an undertaking to appear before the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings through an unauthorised representative.
Per contra, the ld.DR submitted that both the Assessing Officer and the ld.CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunity to appear before them. However, the assessee has been negligent in responding to the statutory notices and hence, prayed for confirming the order of the ld.CIT(A).
We have heard the rival parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the lower authorities. We note that the Assessing Officer has passed an exparte order by considering the information
:-4-: ITA. No.:360/Chny/2025 available with the department and the same has been dismissed by the ld.CIT(A) - NFAC due to non-participation of the assessee before the first appellate authority. In view of the above and to meet the ends of justice we set aside the order of ld.CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tin Box Company vs CIT, [2001] 249 ITR 216 (SC) and direct AO to denovo frame the assessment order in accordance to law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee to be diligent and file written submissions and relevant documents if advised so.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the court on 05th May, 2025 at Chennai.