SUNIL VASANTRAO CHOKAKKAR,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, KUDAL, KUDAL

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year 2013-14 is directed against the order dated 03.10.2023 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of the Assessment Order dated 23.09.2021 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act.

Registry has pointed out that there is delay of 703 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the delay and relevant contents are reproduced below:

Accordingly this Affidavit is made to explain delay of 703 days in filling appeal with ITAT, Pune, with a humble request to condone the delay and accept the appeal.”

After hearing ld. Departmental Representative and considering the affidavit filed by the assessee stating the reasons which led to delay and also placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 2 SCC 107) I find that due to ‘reasonable cause’ assessee failed to file the appeal within the time limit specified under the Act. I therefore condone the delay of 703 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication.

Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued supporting the order of ld.CIT(A).

I have heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record placed before me. I observe that the assessee is an individual and declared income of ₹4,16,440 in the return of income for A.Y. 2013-14 e-filed on 20.03.2020 Case reopened after issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act and reassessment proceedings were carried out. However, in absence of proper details, ld. Assessing Officer made various additions amounting to ₹16,94,146 and assessed income at ₹21,10,586. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but after filing of the appeal failed to respond to five notices of hearing fixed on the dates of hearing on 07.08.2023, 17.08.2023, 29.08.2023, 11.09.2023 and 22.09.2023. We note that notices of hearing have been issued on five occasions in short span of one and half month and from the grounds of appeal it emerges that the assessee is not accessing e-mail id regularly and therefore notices of hearing went unnoticed. In the statement of facts, assessee has stated that the source of cash deposit was mainly from the loan of ₹8.50 lakh taken from Sindhudurg Zilla Madhyamik –Uchha Madhyamik Shikshak Shikshekettar Karmachari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit and the same was withdrawn in cash and again deposited in Saraswat Cooperative Bank. Assessee has also withdrawn the cash from salary account. Fixed Deposits have been made out of the past savings. It is claimed that deduction u/s.80C for payments made to LIC and provident fund deserves to be allowed as they have been deducted by the employer and paid to the concerned authority.

Considering all these facts stated by the assessee in the statement of facts and also observing that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for non response to the notices of hearing, I deem it appropriate to give one more opportunity to the assessee to go before ld.CIT(A) and adduce evidences in support of its grounds of appeal. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the Ground No.1 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes