YAMINI PANKAJ GAWANDE,AKOLA vs. ITO WARD 1(1), AKOLA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 191/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 June 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SHRI K.M. ROY (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, acknowledging the assessee's medical condition supported by documentary evidence. Observing that the lower authorities passed ex-parte orders not on merit, the Tribunal decided to restore the matter for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, suffering from cancer and undergoing treatment, filed the appeal with a significant delay. The assessment order and the first appellate order were passed ex-parte due to the assessee's inability to attend proceedings. Additions were made to the assessee's income under sections 69A and 69 of the Act.

What were the issues?

Whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal due to the assessee's medical condition and whether to restore the case for fresh adjudication given the ex-parte orders passed by the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 69A,Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL SHRI K.M. ROY

Hearing: 16.06.2025Pronounced: 16.06.2025

I.T.A.No.191/NAG/2025 (Assessment Year 2016-17) Yamini Pankaj Gawande, ITO, 1.1, Akola. Ashirwad Near Malokar Hospital, Civil Lines, Akola PAN : BFPPG 0855 J vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Ms. Veena Agrawal, CA For Revenue : Shri Anand Nagrale, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 16.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 16.06.2025 ORDER PER NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JM:

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 14/06/2024 impugned herein passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [in short, “Ld. Commissioner”] u/sec. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) for the Assessment Year (for short, “AY”) 2016- 17.

2 ITA.No.191/NAG/2025 2. At the outset, it is observed that there is a delay of 202 days in filing this appeal. As per medical documents, specifically dated 16/11/2024, 18/11/2024, 23/11/2024 & 29/04/2025, it is clear that the assessee is a cancer patient and was busy in treatment as claimed by the Assessee by filling a duly sworn affidavit, which resulted into delay in filling of this appeal and therefore the delay is condoned.

3.

Coming to the merits of the case, we observe that the assessment proceedings were carried out during the year 2023, which resulted into passing the assessment order as ex–parte by making additions of ₹ 16,35,500/– and ₹ 80,50,000/– respectively u/sec. 69A & 69 of the Act. Thereafter, vide impugned order dated 14/06/2024, Ld. Commissioner was constrained to decide the appeal filed by the assessee as ex– parte qua non–prosecution, but admittedly not on merit, and therefore, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

4.

As observed above that the Assessee is a cancer patient as substantiated by the relevant medical documents along with duly sworn affidavit and therefore claimed that she could not attend the proceedings before the authorities below. Even otherwise the orders passed by the authorities below are also ex- parte and therefore, for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer being an exceptional case for decision afresh, suffice to say, by affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

3 ITA.No.191/NAG/2025 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 16.06.2025.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →