Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)/NFAC order for AY 2013-14 with a delay of 264 days. The delay was attributed to notices being sent to her mother's email ID, who was not tech-savvy, and the assessee no longer resided with her mother after marriage. The CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order due to non-response from the assessee.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding sufficient cause. It held that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given another opportunity to present her case, and thus, remanded the issues back to the Assessing Officer. The assessee was directed to cooperate with the Revenue and avoid unnecessary adjournments.
Key Issues
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal. 2. Validity of an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) when notices were allegedly sent to an incorrect email address and the assessee was not residing there. 3. Granting an opportunity to the assessee to represent her case.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & 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 CIT(A)/NFAC, order dated 11.03.2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2013-14.
There is a delay of 264 days in filing this appeal. The assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay supported by affidavit stating therein reasons for belated filing of the appeal. The reasons stated in the condonation application for belated filing of the appeal
- 2 - is that notices were sent to assessee’s mother’s e-mail ID, who is not well versed with the electronic communication mode and since assessee got married she is not residing with her mother. Hence, there was delay in filing the appeal.
On perusal of the aforesaid reasons in the condonation application, we are of the view that there is sufficient cause for belated filing of the appeal and no latches can be attributed to the assessee. Hence, we condone the delay in filing this appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits.
At the very outset, we notice that the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order. The reason for deciding the appeal ex-parte was that the assessee did not reply to the notices issued from the office of the CIT(A). The ld.AR submitted that in the interest of justice and equity, one more opportunity may be provided to assessee to represent its case before the AO.
The ld.DR supported the orders of CIT(A) and AO.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Office of the CIT(A) had issued four hearing notices directing the assessee to file certain details/documents. Since there was no response by the assessee to the notices issued, the CIT(A)
- 3 - passed ex-parte orders. It is the claim of the assessee that the notices issued through e-mail have been sent to her mother’s e-mail ID and the assessee is not residing with her mother after marriage.
In the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that assessee ought to be provided with one more opportunity to represent her case and accordingly, the issues raised in this appeal are restored to the files of the AO. The assessee is directed to co- operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 20th March, 2025.