SONIA JAWA,PANCHKULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3, PANCHKULA

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ “बी” , चǷीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH

HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE

ŵी लिलत कुमार, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी मनोज कुमार अŤवाल, लेखा सद˟
BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 3/Chd/2025
िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2015-16

Sonia Jawa
C/o M.K. Aggarwal & Associates
SCO 1, First Floor Sector 11
Panchkula -134109
बनाम

The ITO
Ward -3
Panchkula, Haryana
˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AOKPJ7831A
अपीलाथŎ/Appellant
ŮȑथŎ/Respondent

िनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Assessee by :
Shri Mukesh Aggarwal, C.A राजˢ की ओर से/ Revenue by :
Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR (Virtual Mode)

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing :
22/05/2025
उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 23/05/2025

आदेश/Order

PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M:

This is an appeal filed by the Assesse against the order of the Ld.
CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dt. 28/02/2024 for the Assessment Year 2015-16, wherein the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine on the ground of delay in filing the appeal beyond the period prescribed under section 249(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).
2. The assessee had filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the assessment order passed under section 147/144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated
28.03.2022. 3. The appeal was filed on 08.09.2022, resulting in a delay of 134 days. The assessee had explained that the delay occurred due to personal hardship in the 2

family, as she was actively engaged in providing care and support to her sister- in-law who was suffering from cancer.
4. The Ld. CIT(A) refused to condone the delay holding that the cause shown by the assessee was not sufficient and failed to meet the statutory requirement of “sufficient cause” under section 249(3) of the Act. As a result, the appeal was dismissed without adjudication on merits.
5. Ld. AR submitted that The delay was not deliberate, intentional or due to any disregard of legal obligations, but occurred due to compelling and unavoidable personal circumstances. The assessee was engaged in providing full-time care and emotional support to her sister-in-law, who was undergoing a prolonged and terminal illness (cancer). The entire family, including the assessee, was involved in ensuring round-the-clock care, which inadvertently led to a delay in compliance with legal timelines. It was prayed that delay in filling the appeal may kindly be condoned and Ld. CIT(A) be directed to decide the appeal on merit.
6. Per conra Ld. DR relied upon the order of lower authority.
7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In our considered view, the reasons advanced by the assessee for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) appear to be bona fide and fall within the scope of “sufficient cause” as envisaged under the Act and as interpreted by judicial precedents including the decision of the Hon’ble
Order pronounced in the open Court on 23/05/2025 मनोज कुमार अŤवाल

लिलत कुमार
(MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL)

(LALIET KUMAR)
लेखा सद˟/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ɋाियक सद˟ /JUDICIAL MEMBER

AG

आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :

आदेशानुसार/ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार/