MANNANGKATTI ARUMUGAM,PUDUCHERRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3, PUDUCHERRY, PUDUCHERRY

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 06.12.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2020-21.

On perusing the order of FAA, we noted that the assessee had filed application for condonation of delay along with affidavit stating the reasons that the assessee is a retired policeman and is not fully conversant with modern technology or the procedures involved in faceless e-proceedings of Income-tax Department. Consequently, the assessee was not aware of the assessment proceedings or assessment order being passed by the AO and only on receipt of call from the income-office office for recovery of demand, assessee became aware of the order being passed by the AO. Immediately the assessee sought the assistance of a professional and filed the appeal, with a delay. However, the FAA dismissed the appeal of the assessee stating that the there is no sufficient cause for condoning the delay and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

The Ld.AR before us submitted that the assessee is a retired policeman and is not conversant with electronic procedures of 3 -: income tax proceedings and hence, could not effectively participate in the faceless proceedings. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessee was unaware of the assessment proceedings before the AO and the order being passed by him. The assessee became aware of the assessment order only on receipt of call from the income-tax office for recovery of outstanding demand. Hence, there was a delay in filing the appeal before the FAA. The Ld.AR pleaded that since the assessee was unaware of the assessment proceedings, one last opportunity may be provided to the assessee to represent his case before the AO.