JALGAON JAMOD LOKSANCHALIT SADHAN KENDRA,BULDANA vs. ITO WARD 1, KHAMGAON, KHAMGAON
Facts
The assessee's accountant passed away, causing a delay of 112 days in filing the present appeal and 167 days in filing the first appeal. The assessee provided a death certificate as evidence.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, considering the demise of the assessee's accountant and the circumstances presented. The Tribunal also noted that the impugned order was ex-parte.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal is condonable on account of the death of the assessee's accountant? Whether the ex-parte order requires to be set aside and the case remanded for fresh adjudication on merits?
Sections Cited
250, 144, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH “SMC”, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY
Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the
order dated 19.11.2024, impugned herein, passed by the National
Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250
of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2020-
21.
In the instant case, at the outset, it is observed that there is a
delay of 112 days in filing of the instant appeal, on which the
Assessee has claimed as under:
2 ITA No.333/NAG/2025 M/s. Jalgoan Jamod Loksanchalit Sadhan Kendra
“ That due to demise of Assessee’s accountant on dated 21.12.2024 the delay in filing of appeal before this Court as well as before the Ld. Commissioner has been occurred. The delay was unintentional, malafide and therefore the delay may be condoned.”
In support of aforesaid claim, the Assessee also filed the death certificate of Shri Rajesh Ramesh Thakre (Assessee’s accountant).
This Court has given thoughtful considerations to the peculiar
facts and circumstances of the case. Admittedly Shri Rajesh
Ramesh Thakre (Assessee’s accountant) has expired on 21.12.2024
and the Assessee has claimed “That because of long illness said
person had expired who was handling the case of the Assessee and the
Assesse has also mentioned the fact at column No.15 of form no.35 that
it was busy in hospital work, so unable to file the appeal in time. So
please consider the condonation of delay.”
Thus considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and
circumstances, this Court is inclined to condone the delay of 112
days in filing the instant appeal as well as 167 days occurred in
filing of first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner.
Coming to the merits of the case, it is observed that
impugned order is an ex-parte because of the aforesaid reasons and
3 ITA No.333/NAG/2025 M/s. Jalgoan Jamod Loksanchalit Sadhan Kendra
hence, for just and proper decision of the case and substantial
justice, this Court is remanding the case to the file of the Ld.
Commissioner for decision on merit qua additions/disallowances
made by the AO vide assessment order dated 28.09.2022 u/s 144
r.w.s 144B of the Act.
In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in open Court 26.06.2025 .
Sd/- (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY) JUDICIAL MEMBER * Kishore, Sr. P.S.
Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Nagpur The DR Concerned Bench
//True Copy//
By Order
Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Nagpur.
