Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Araguntulu Balaramraja Ram Geetha, filed an appeal against an ex-parte assessment order for AY 2018-19. The appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-participation. The assessee's husband's death and her subsequent personal distress caused a delay in filing the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, acknowledging the assessee's circumstances. The Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment, ensuring a reasonable opportunity for the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned due to the assessee's personal hardship, and whether the ex-parte assessment order and CIT(A)'s order should be set aside to provide a fair hearing.
Sections Cited
144, 68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON’BLE & SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, HON’BLE
अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. T.Vasudevan, Advocate ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Shri. Keerthi Narayanan, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 22.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 28.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R
PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal by the assessee is filed against the order of the Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Virudhunagar, for the assessment year 2018-19, dated 16.04.2024.
At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 216 days in appeal filed by the assessee, for which petition for condonation of delay along with reasons for delay has been filed. In the condonation
:-2-: ITA. No:331/Chny/2025 petition, it is stated that the assessee’s husband was expired on 19.07.2021 at the age of 48 years and later the assessee moved to her parents’ house with her daughter and was not aware of the impugned order dated 16.04.2024 till the recovery proceedings were initiated by the Income Tax department. After considering the petition 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.
The assessee is an individual. Filed her return of income for the assessment year 2018-19 declaring total income of Rs.7,64,410/-. The case was selected for a limited scrutiny for the reason large agricultural income that large agriculture income. Accordingly, statutory notices were issued to the assessee. However, the assessee did not participate in the assessment proceedings and hence the assessing officer passed an exparte order under Section 144 of the Act dated 15.04.2021 by making an addition of Rs.86,90,000/- under Section 68 of the Act to the total income and concluded the assessment. Subsequently, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT (A), NFAC. However, the assessee did not participate in the appeal proceedings also inspite of providing five opportunities by the ld.CIT(A) from 09.11.2023 to 08.04.2024 as noted in paragraph 5 of the ld.CIT(A) order. Hence, the ld.CIT(A) passed an order dated
:-3-: ITA. No:331/Chny/2025 16.04.2024 by confirming the Assessing Officer’s order and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before us.
The ld.AR submitted that the assessee is a female, lost her husband when he was 48 years and was shattered with a loss of the companion who was taking care of entire financial aspects of the assessee. The ld.AR brought to our notice that both the orders of the Assessing Officer and that of ld.CIT(A) are passed without the participation of the assessee and hence, prayed for one more opportunity before the Assessing Officer in the interest of natural justice. Further, the ld.AR stated he undertakes to appear before the Assessing Officer and submit all the required information and documents as and when called for.
Per contra, the ld.CIT (A) fairly conceded for remitting the matter back to the Assessing Officer, since the order was passed u/s.144 of the Act.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material 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 available with the department and made an addition and the same has been dismissed by the ld.CIT(A) - NFAC due to non- participation of the assessee in the first appellate proceedings. Therefore, we set aside the order of the ld.CIT(A), to meet the ends of :-4-: ITA. No:331/Chny/2025 justice we 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, 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 open court on 28th April, 2025 at Chennai.