Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 125 days against an ex-parte appellate order. The delay was attributed to inactive mobile numbers and email IDs on the Income Tax portal, and a lack of proper service of hearing notices.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 125 days in filing the appeal, subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 5,000/-. The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to grant one more opportunity for hearing and decide the case on merits.
Key Issues
Whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal due to technical issues and non-service of notices, and if so, whether to grant a fresh opportunity for hearing on merits.
Sections Cited
144, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH
Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha
Sanjay Ghanshyamdas Income Tax Officer, Tahilramani Ward-3(1)(4), Shop No. 4, Shailraj Vs Vadodara Complex, Opp. Baroda Dairy, Makarpura Road, Gujarat-390010 PAN: AQOPT0560A (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee Represented: Shri Jayesh Dhanani & Shri Mehul KIshnani, A.Rs. Revenue Represented: Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 20-08-2025 Date of pronouncement : 22-08-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the exparte appellate order dated 22.08.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the exparte reassessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2020-21.
A.Y. 2020-21 Page No 2 Sanjay Ghanshyamdas Tahilramani Vs. ITO
The registry has noted that there is a delay of 125 days in filing the above appeal. The assessee explained by way of Notarized Affidavit, there was a delay of 158 days in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) also because of Mobile Number and email id which was mentioned in the Income Tax Portal were inactive. Further in appeal before Ld. CIT(A) in Form No. 35, assessee categorically mentioned not to send the hearing notices through email but requested for physical hearing notices which were not served on the assessee, which has resulted in passing exparte appellate order. Further the assessee placed on record, the original return filed before the Assessing Officer and Audit Report and requested to condone the delay in filing the above appeal.
Per contra, Ld. Sr. D.R. appearing for the Revenue strongly opposed the delay in filing the appeal and requested to sustain the order passed by the Lower Authorities.
We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. It is seen from Form No. 35 which is statutory form for filing appeal before Ld. CIT(A), assessee categorically not to send notices through email. However Ld. CIT(A) sent first hearing notice dated 17-05-2024 to submit the documentary evidence of date of service of the assessment order and further reminders sent on 07-06-2024 and 31-07-2024 and there was no response from the assessee. Therefore Ld. CIT(A) refused to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. It is further stated that in the Notarized Affidavit, after the Income Tax Department created attachment of assessee’s bank A.Y. 2020-21 Page No 3 Sanjay Ghanshyamdas Tahilramani Vs. ITO account, he came to know about the exparte appellate order which has resulted in filing this appeal with a delay of 125 days. Considering the explanation offered by the assessee, we deem it fit to impose a cost of Rs. 5,000/- payable by the assessee to condone the delay of 125 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The cost is to be paid within two weeks of receipt of this order and the cost payment receipt to be produced before Ld. CIT(A). Further we direct the Ld. CIT(A) to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee and explain the delay and then pass order on merits of the case by giving physical hearing notice. Needless to say, the assessee should cooperate by filing all necessary documents, affidavit explaining the delay before Ld. CIT(A) for passing order on merits.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.