MALKIT KAUR,NABHA vs. ITO WARD NABHA, NABHA
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ,चǷीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DIVISION BENCH,‘SMC’,CHANDIGARH
BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.43/CHD/2025
िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year : 2015-16
Malkiat Kaur
Village Allowal, Tehsil
Nabha-147202
बनाम
The ITO,
Nabha.
̾थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: HSPPK08141L
अपीलाथŎ/Appellant
ŮȑथŎ/Respondent
( PHYSICALHEARING )
िनधाŊįरतीकीओरसे/Assessee by : Sh.Arman Cajla, Advocate & Shri
Rakesh Cajla, Advocate.
राजˢकीओरसे/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur,Sr. DR
सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing
:
26-05-2025
उदघोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement
:
30-05-2025
आदेश/Order
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 06-08-2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income
Tax,
National
Faceless
Appeal
Centre
(NFAC),
Delhi[hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], for the Assessment Year
2015-16. 2. The Assessee in this appeal is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer
(A.O.) of Rs. 29,29,750/- .The Assessee is aggrieved for dismissal
43-Chd-2025
Malkiat Kaur, Nabha
2
the appeal of the Assessee by the CIT(A) holding the same as barred by limitation.
3. A perusal of the impugned order of CIT(A) reveals that the assessment order was passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) on 13.03.2024 under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act,1961. The said assessment order was allegedly served upon the assessee through e- mail. The appeal was filed before the CIT(A) on 30.04.2024. As per the ld. CIT(A), the Assessee was supposed to file appeal within 30
days from the date of receipt of copy of the order, whereas, the case of the Assesssee is that the Assessee is an agriculturist and not conversant with the provisions of the law, hence, a minor delay in filing the appeal had occurred. The Ld. CIT(A), however, without giving any opportunity of hearing to the Assessee, rejected the appeal of the Assessee in a summarily manner.
4. I have heard the rival contentions and gone thought the record.
The Assessee is a lady and is not conversant with the Income Tax proceedings and law. The physical copy of the assessment order was never served upon the Assessee. The assessment order was sent through e-mail which perhaps did not come to the notice of the Assessee. Under the circumstances, the minor delay occurred in filing the appeal before the CIT (A) was required be condoned. The 43-Chd-2025
Malkiat Kaur, Nabha
3
Assessee in her appeal before the CIT(A) in Form No. 35 had categorically mentioned against the column as to “whether that the notices/communication may be sent on email” as “No”. It, itself, show that the Assessee was not comfortable/conversant with the communication sent through email.
5. Under these circumstances, in my view, the interests of justice will be well served, if, the Assessee be given an opportunity to present her case before the Ld. CIT(A). The impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) is, accordingly, set aside. The small delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby condoned. The matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to hear the appeal of the Assessee on merits in accordance with the law. Ld.
CIT(A) will serve the notice of hearing through electronic mode as well as through physical mode service i.e. through registered post/through messenger.
6. With the above observations, the appeal of the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 30-05-2025. आदेशकीŮितिलिपअŤेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथŎ/ The Appellant
2. ŮȑथŎ/ The Respondent
43-Chd-2025
Malkiat Kaur, Nabha
4
3. आयकरआयुƅ/ CIT
4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयआिधकरण, चǷीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, sCHANDIGARH
5. गाडŊफाईल/ Guard File
सहायकपंजीकार/