Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 130 days, citing a lack of commerce knowledge, reliance on a consultant who failed to guide them, and personal medical challenges. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-submission of documents, with the assessee claiming notices were only sent via email, not physical mail, despite a request in Form 35.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to sufficient cause shown by the assessee. Considering the ex-parte dismissal and the assessee's claims regarding non-receipt of notices, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and whether the ex-parte assessment made by the AO should be set aside for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
250, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KAND
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’s order dated 21.05.2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2017-18.
2. There is a delay of 130 days in filing this appeal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay along with affidavit stating therein the reasons for belated filing of this appeal. The reasons stated in the condonation application for belated filing of this appeal are as under:- “I am not a commerce graduate or familiar with the intricacies of the Income- tax Act, 1961. I relied entirely on my consultant to handle the proceedings before the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). Unfortunately, the said consultant failed to guide me regarding the appropriate procedure and timelines for filing an appeal before the Tribunal. ii) Further, during this period and thereafter, I was preoccupied with the continuous medical treatment of my daughter, Ms.Sadhana Shree, my mother, Mrs. Kasthuri and myself. These personal challenges made it difficult for me to actively monitor my tax matters or follow up with the consultant. Some of the medical bills related to their treatment are attached with this affidavit for the Hon’ble Tribunal’s kind consideration.”
On perusal of the aforesaid reason stated, we are of the view that no latches can be attributed to the assessee as there is sufficient cause for belated filing of this appeal. 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 appeal of the assessee has been dismissed ex-parte qua assessee. In response to five hearing notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority, the assessee has not furnished his submissions or any documentary evidences. Consequently the appeal of the assessee was dismissed ex-parte qua assessee.
5. The ld.AR submitted that the hearing notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority was never received by the assessee as the same was sent through e-mail. The ld.AR further stated that the assessee had specifically mentioned in Form 35 that hearing notices should not be sent through e-mail. Further, the ld.AR submitted that the proceedings before the First Appellate Authority remained non- compliant since the hearing notices were never received in physical form to the assessee’s address. It was submitted by the Ld.AR, in the interest of justice and equity, the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to represent his case before the AO, since it was a best judgment assessment u/s.144 of the Act.
The ld.DR supported the order of the AO and the CIT(A).
We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The Office of the First Appellate Authority had issued five hearing notices. It was the contention of the ld.AR that the assessee had not received the hearing notices sent from the office of the CIT(A) since the notices were sent only through e-mail though the assessee had specifically mentioned in Form 35 that hearing notices should not be sent through e-mail. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be provided to the assessee to represent his case. Since the AO is also best judgment assessment, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the files of the AO. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the files of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24th January, 2025 at Chennai.