Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal late by 70 days, citing the need to care for his elderly mother and lack of internet knowledge. The appeal was against an ex-parte order by the CIT(Appeals) for AY 2016-17. The assessee had sold property and received interest, which the Assessing Officer treated as escaped income, adding back long-term capital gains.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, acknowledging the assessee's explanation and the need for natural justice. The CIT(Appeals)'s ex-parte order was set aside, and the matter was remitted back for a fresh decision.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the CIT(Appeals) order should be set aside for a fresh hearing.
Sections Cited
148, 142(1), 271(1)(c), 139
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ)
Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Vivek Kumar Rana,…….……….………..………Appellant 101, Artak Apartment, Ashiana Road, B.V. College, S.O. Rukanpura, Patna-800014, Bihar [PAN:ADHPR8630D] -Vs.- Assessment Unit, Delhi,………………….…....Respondent ITO/NFAC, Delhi Appearances by: Shri Manish Sinha, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: June 17, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: June 24, 2025 O R D E R
The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 7th October 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2016-17.
The appeal is time barred by 70 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. However, the assessee filed a condonation petition (A.Y. 2016-2017) Vivek Kumar Rana saying that due to treatment of his old aged mother during the period, he could not visit the website portal being not aware of minimum internet online knowledge and, therefore, was not aware of the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) When the assessee came to know about the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) without considering the merit of the case, the assessee approached the ld. A.R. to prefer appeal, due to that there was a delay of 70 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, he pleaded to condone the delay.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the assessee was prevented in filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Therefore, I am inclined to condone the delay of 70 days. Hence the delay is condoned.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an Individual and was reported to be a non-filer. Information was received from Insight portal which suggested that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment for the relevant assessment year. The assessee sold immovable property valued at Rs.84,23,000/-, received interest on securities amounting to Rs.6,89,396/- and paid credit card bills through SBI Cards amounting to Rs.4,31,572/-. During the assessment proceedings, the ld. Assessing Officer issued notices under sections 148 and 142(1) of the Act and in reply, the assessee informed that he had already shown the capital gains from sale of property and the interest received in his return of income filed for the AY 2016-17 on 29th July, 2016. The ld. Assessing Officer issued letter to the assessee (A.Y. 2016-2017) Vivek Kumar Rana asking to produce the details of long-term capital gain and the purchase and sale deed of the property sold. The assessee did not come up with any information regarding the calculation of LTCG and the cost of improvement of Rs.11,70,510/- on the property claimed by the assessee by any documents, therefore, not being satisfied, the ld. Assessing officer added back to the total income of the assessee as undisclosed income from long-term capital gain and initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Thus ld. Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.47,99,250/- (income as per return of income filed u/s 139 amounting to Rs.36,28,740/- plus undisclosed LTCG of Rs.11,70,510/-).
Being not satisfied, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals).
The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given several opportunities to the assessee to substantiate his claim, but the appellant neither filed the written submission nor represented the case before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Thereafter the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal ex-parte on 7th October, 2024.
On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT.
(A.Y. 2016-2017) Vivek Kumar Rana 8. At the time of hearing, ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the Bench that the impugned order be set aside and remitted back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) for deciding it afresh.
At the outset, ld. D.R. brought to my notice that the assessee did not produce the relevant documents as asked by the ld. Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer passed the assessment order determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.47,99,250/- (income as per return of income filed u/s 139 amounting to Rs.36,28,740/- plus undisclosed LTCG of Rs.11,70,510/-). Thereafter the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given many opportunities to the assessee and the assessee neither filed written submission nor any evidence before the ld. CIT(Appeals). He further submitted that before the ITAT, the assessee did not substantiate his claim. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals).
I have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials