Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Kulwant Kaur, filed appeals against orders concerning additions made under Section 147 and penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for AY 2011-12. The appeals were filed with significant delays.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals after considering the genuine hardships faced by the assessee due to her husband's ill health and their NRI status. The matter was remitted to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeals should be condoned on grounds of genuine hardship and unavoidable circumstances? Whether the addition and penalty should be adjudicated afresh by the CIT(A)?
Sections Cited
250, 147, 271(1)(c), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES “SMC”, JAIPUR
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD
आदेश / ORDER
1. The captioned appeals at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2011-12 are directed against the separate orders dated 21.12.2022 and 17.05.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC) Delhi u/s 250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961.
2. Registry has informed that the appeals before this Tribunal are time barred by 246 and 765 days respectively. Application for condonation of delay has been placed on record. Since the contents of the applications are same, condonation application filed by the assessee for is reproduced below :
“In the present case the 1, Mrs. Kulwant Kaur, is the wife of Shri Hari Singh who is a war patron and retired personnel of the Indian Armed Forces who has been impacted by war-related disabilities. Both, the appellant and her husband are currently Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) residing in Australia with their children.
The impugned order under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was passed by the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)NFAC on 21/12/2022, and the statutory period for filing the appeal before this Hon'ble Tribunal expired on 19/02/2023 and there has been a delay of 765 days in filing the present appeal which is neither deliberate nor intentional but solely due to the genuine and unavoidable circumstances explained herein below.
That Shri Hari Singh (my husband), was primarily managing all my taxation compliance related aspects. However, since last few years, he has been unwell and suffering from multiple serious health issues, including memory loss, heart-related ailments, and other complications etc. In this regard, I'm hereby enclosing a medical certificate issued by his doctor in Australia for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Bench.
That since I am not updated regarding ongoing appellate proceedings more so due to the ill health of my husband I neither have any idea about any kind of notices issued and subsequently appellate order passed by income tax authorities nor I received any communication thereof.
3. That the delay in filing this appeal is purely circumstantial, without any malafide intent or negligence on my part.
In view of the genuine hardships and unavoidable circumstances beyond my control, it is prayed that the delay in filing the appeal may kindly be condoned, and the matter may be decided on merits in the interest of natural justice.”
After hearing both the sides and going through the averments made in the condonation applications by the assessee, I find that due to 'reasonable cause' assessee failed to file the appeals within the stipulated time limit. Having regard to the facts of the instant case, I condone the delay of 246 and 765 days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals for adjudication in light of judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382).
4. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the appeal is against the addition made in the assessment order passed u/s.147 of the Act for A.Y. 2011-12 and is against the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. He fairly admitted that assessee failed to appear before ld.CIT(A) and could not furnish any details and documentary evidence in support of grounds of appeal regarding the quantum addition as well as against the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Ac. He submitted that the main reason for non-compliance is that the husband of the assessee who is a retired personnel of the Indian Armed force is not keeping good health for a long time and currently both the husband and assessee are residing in Australia with their children. Due to this reason, details could not be compiled and filed before the lower authorities. Therefore, prayer made to restore back all the issues regarding to quantum as well as penalty to the file of ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. Ld. Departmental Representative did not oppose this request.
Under these given facts and circumstances, I in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, remit all the issues raised in the instant appeals to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is at liberty to adduce all the required submissions/evidences before ld.CIT(A) to substantiate the case. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned orders are set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 29th day of July, 2025.