SUBRAMANIAM SURESH,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, WARD 1(6), SALEM, SALEM

These appeals by the assessee are against separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short "CIT(A)") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 dated 30.01.2025 against the order u/s.143(3) passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) and dated 14.10.2025 against the penalty order u/s.271(1)(c) passed by the AO.

The assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income. The A.O received information that the assessee has cash deposits in bank amounting to Rs. 23,73,700/- during the year under consideration. Therefore, the A.O reopened the assessment by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 28.03.2019. The A.O completed the assessment u/s. 147 of the Act r.w.s 144 of the Act assessing the income at Rs. 23,73,700/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). There was a delay of 880 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the CIT(A). Therefore the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A).

There is a delay of 599 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the assessee is an agriculturist and an illiterate not well versed with use of computers and electronic mode. The Ld. AR further submitted that due to lack of technical knowledge, the assessee was not able to access emails on income tax portals and hence did not respond to the notices of the lower authorities. The Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee was completely dependent on the tax consultant and due to tax consultant's negligence the assessee did not know the status of assessment as well as the appellate proceedings. The assessee also filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) as well as before the Tribunal. The assessee in the affidavit has stated that he has a health condition due which is unable to move out of the house for prolonged period of time (last 6 years). The assessee also submitted the medical records in this regard along with the affidavit. The assessee has pleaded that due to his health he was & 3347/Chny/2025 Subramaniam Suresh :- 3 -: solely dependent on the tax consultant who did not handle the tax proceedings properly. The assessee has also stated that when the AO personally visited informed about the pending tax arrears, the assessee came to know of the tax proceedings as the appellate order being passed. The assessee further states that a new tax consultant is appointed on whose advice the present appeals are filed.