KALAISELVI,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI

There is a delay of 355 days in filing this appeal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay stating therein the reasons for belated filing of this appeal. The reasons stated for late filing of the appeal is that assessee has never received any hearing notices from Office of First Appellate Authority and was not aware of the impugned order being passed. It is stated that the assessee came to know of impugned order being passed only on 05.12.2024 when he was informed by the jurisdictional income-tax office demanding tax liability against assessment.

On perusal of the aforesaid reasons in the condonation application, we are of the view that there is reasonable cause for belated filing of this 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.

We find that the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order, dismissing the appeal in limine, without condoning delay of 127 days in filing the appeal. The CIT(A) has observed at para 6 of the impugned order though the assessee had submitted certain grounds for the delay in filing appeal vide Column No.15 of Form No.35, she has failed to file formal petition seeking condonation of delay along with affidavit and supporting documentary evidence to demonstrate ‘sufficient cause’.

The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that assessee was never in receipt of hearing notices issued from Office of the CIT(A). Hence, the assessee could not explain reasons for belated filing of appeal before CIT(A). The Ld. AR submitted assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to explain reasons for delay in filing before CIT(A).

The Ld.DR supported orders of AO and CIT(A).

We have heard rival submissions and perused material on record. We find that during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee had represented her case before the AO. It is the claim of Ld.AR that assessee was never in receipt of hearing notices sent through e-mail ID. It is stated by the Ld.AR that assessee is an agriculturist and not a computer literate and do not view the e-mail. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to various notices issued from the Office of the First Appellate Authority. However, in the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that assessee ought to be provided with one more opportunity to explain reasons for belated filing of appeal before the First Appellate Authority. Accordingly, this appeal is restored to the files of CIT(A). The assessee is directed to file a petition for condonation of delay and a supporting affidavit stating reasons for belated filing the appeal before CIT(A). Needless to say, in the event CIT(A) condones delay, he shall adjudicate the matter on merits. It is ordered accordingly.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.