V. VENKATARAMAN HUF,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, NCC-2, MADURAI

Assessment Years: 2017-18 V.Venkataraman HUF Deputy Commissioner of Income Represented by V. Kalavathy, Tax, W/o.Late V.Venkataraman, Non-Corporate Circle-2, No.25, Thillai Nagar, Sattur, Madurai. Virudhunagar Dist, Tamil Nadu-626 203. [PAN: AACHV5604B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Shri S.Sundar Raman, CA. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Ms.Gowthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 23.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 30.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2023-24 / 1052834635(1) dated 15.05.2023 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2017-18 2.0 It has been noted that there is a delay of 579 days in the case, in filing of this appeal before the tribunal. In its affidavit the assesse has pleaded that the assesse is the present karta of HUF of her husband late V.Venkataraman who died on 14.03.2023. It has been submitted that she is semi-literate lady not very conversant with tax matters. The death of her husband and accompanying problems contributed towards the delay in filing of this appeal. All these activities contributed to the delay which was neither willful nor wanton. The assesse submitted that there will not be case of any non-compliance now. We have considered the justification put forth by the assesse and we are satisfied with their adequacy. We are also conscious of the fact that no litigant gains by intentionally delaying its own matters. The Ld. DR did not pose any serious objections to the delay. Accordingly, we hereby condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate this appeal. 3.0 The twin issues contested through the present appeal is regarding the action of the Ld.AO in making an addition of Rs.11,23,500/- on account of unexplained cash deposits in the bank account made during the demonetization period and treatment of Rs. 30,64,903/- as non-agricultural income. At the outset, Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. Attention was invited to para 4 of appellate order indicating that three opportunities were provided to the assessee. The Ld. Counsel attributed the reasons for non-compliance also to the death of the assessee’s husband. It was also argued that the Ld.CIT(A) was provided written submissions and statement of facts filed Page - 2 - of 4 along with Form-35 which had remained unconsidered. The Ld.Counsel submitted that in earlier years, its come has been regularly assessed as income from agricultural activities and that therefore, the action of the Ld.AO was not correct. It was requested that one last opportunity be provided to present its case before the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.AR gave personal assurance that full compliance will be made to the statutory notices. 4.0 The Ld.DR relied upon the orders of lower authorities. 5.0 We heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. There is no denying the fact that the assessee has not adequately complied with the statutory notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A). It is also a fact that the written submissions and statement of facts filed along with Form-35 have not been considered by the Ld.First Appellate Authority while merely dismissing the appeal on grounds of non- compliance. Details placed on records during the present proceedings indicate that agricultural income has been accepted by the Revenue in earlier years. Be that as it may be, we are of the considered view that, considering overall facts of the case as also in the interest of justice, the assessee deserves another opportunity before the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld.First Appellate Authority and direct him to adjudicate the matter de novo after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. He may obtain remand remand report from Page - 3 - of 4 Ld.AO if deemed necessary. The assessee shall comply with all the statutory notices and any non-compliance would be adversely viewed. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.