Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an 80-year-old super senior person, did not file an income tax return. Following search operations, the Assessing Officer issued notices under sections 153C read with 153A concerning the sale of agricultural lands, recomputing long-term capital gains after allowing section 54EC deduction. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices, leading the assessee (represented by legal heir after demise) to appeal before the ITAT, with a delay of 152 days.
Held
The ITAT condoned the 152-day delay in filing the appeal, accepting the reasonable cause provided. Observing that the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order was passed without full consideration of facts and principles of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, ensuring adequate opportunity for the assessee to present their case.
Key Issues
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal before the Tribunal. 2. Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity of hearing, particularly when the assessee had expired.
Sections Cited
Section 250, Section 153C, Section 153A, Section 142(1), Section 54EC, Section 153 r.w.s. 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH PANAJI
Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
Assessee by Shri.Chetan Chougle.AR Revenue by Shri.Satish.M. CIT DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 15.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 16.09.2025 ORDER
PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE ,JM:
The assesse has filed the appeal against the order of the CIT(A)-2 Panaji passed u/sec 250 of the Act. The assesse has raised the grounds of appeal
challenging the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer.
2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that there is a delay of 152 days in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the assesse has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay. Whereas, the facts mentioned in the Pratibha P Kulkarani Represented by legal heir chidambar kukarni. affidavit are reasonable and sufficient cause was explained and the Ld. DR has no specific objections. Accordingly, condone the delay and admit the appeal.
The brief facts of the case are that, the assesse is a super senior person aged about 80 years and has not filed the return of income, There was search operations conducted in the case of Dhammanagi group and others. The assessee along with other family/ co owners have sold agriculture lands to this group and some material information was found. The assessing officer considering the material and details has issued notice u/sec 153C r.w.s153A of the Act on the assessee. In compliance the assessee has filed the return of income on 14.12.2021 disclosing a total income of Rs.3,00,260/-.Further notice u/sec142(1) of the Act issued calling for information in respect of sale of agricultural lands. In compliance the Ld.AR of the assessee appeared and submitted the details and information. The Assessing officer dealt on the evidences, provisions of capital gains and recomputed the long term capital gains and after allowing the deduction under section 54EC of the Act has determined the taxable Long term capital gains of Rs,3,77,800/- and assessed the total income of Rs.6,78,066/-and passed the order u/sec153r.w.s144 of the Act dated 24.03.2022.
Aggrieved by the order, the assesse has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the Pratibha P Kulkarani Represented by legal heir chidambar kukarni. grounds of appeal
, statement of facts and findings of the AO and has issued notices of hearing and since there was no compliance by the assessee to notices. Therefore the CIT(A) considering the information on record has confirmed the action of the A.O and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assesse has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal.
5. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing officer overlooking the information of the assessment proceedings. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has expired on 31.01.2025 due to illness and non compliance before the CIT(A) is not a wanton act . Further the Ld.AR mentioned that the assessee has a good case on merits and shall substantiate with the material evidences and prayed for an opportunity to explain before the lower authorities. Per Contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(A).
6. Heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie the CIT(A) has passed the order considering the facts that there is no compliance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and the notices were issued. Therefore, the CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismissed the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the assessing officer. The Ld. CIT(A) has issued the two notices of hearing i.e 27.11.2024 & Pratibha P Kulkarani Represented by legal heir chidambar kukarni. 3.12.2024 referred at Page 3 Para 4.2 of the CIT(A) order but there was no response and thus the CIT(A) came to a conclusion that the assessee is not interested and decided the appeal based on the information available on record. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the addition made by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the principles of natural justice, we shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the disputed issue to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal. And, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
7. In the result, the appeal filed by assesse is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 16.09.2025.