INDERJIT KAUR,NAKODAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, NAKODAR, NAKODAR
Facts
The assessee, a senior citizen, initially filed her return u/s 139 disclosing income from a life insurance policy surrender. Reassessment proceedings by the AO u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 resulted in an addition based on the same income, increasing the total income. Her subsequent appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a 146-day delay, as she was out of the country and claimed unawareness of proceedings, with notices sent to an agent's email.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 146-day delay, finding no willful default or neglect given the assessee's explanation of being abroad. The case was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment. The AO is directed to verify the income disclosed in the original return u/s 139(1) against Form 26AS and provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned; Whether reassessment proceedings were valid given prior income disclosure; Whether the matter should be remanded for fresh assessment.
Sections Cited
Section 250, Section 144, Section 147, Section 139, Section 148, Section 282
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) NFAC Delhi dated 20.05.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has
emanated from the order of the AO, NFAC, Delhi passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the
Act, 1961 dated 22.03.2022.
2 I.T.A. No. 413/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 2. There are five grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in Form No. 36, out of
which ground no. 2 relates to the issue that the appeal has been dismissed in limine
by the first appellate authority without admitting the appeal for hearing on merits,
refusing to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the first appellate authority
by 146 (one hundred forty-six) days.
Brief facts emerging from records are that the assessee is a senior citizen and
has submitted her return u/s 139 of the Act on 26.07.2016 disclosing a total income
of Rs.9,16,995/-, being the income derived from surrender policy of Bajaj Allianz
Life Insurance Co. Ltd.
However, it is seen that the reassessment proceedings has been commenced by
the AO on 31.03.2021 by issue of notice u/s 148 recording the same issue and in
absence of any response or any representation from the assessee, total income has
been determined at Rs.18.33 lakhs by making the same addition of Rs.9,16,752/-
arising from surrender of the policy of Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd.
The matter was carried in appeal and the ld. first appellate authority dismissed
the appeal without admitting the same for hearing on merits on the grounds that the
appeal has been belatedly filed by 146 days and in absence of sufficient reasons put
forth by the assessee, for condonation of the said delay.
3 I.T.A. No. 413/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 6. Now, the assessee is before the Tribunal and in course of hearing or written
submission has been filed by the assessee (there has not been any physical
representation by the assessee or his ld. AR) and from the said submission, it is
gathered that the assessee was out of the country and has returned to India on
22.08.2022 that is after the assessment order already passed on 22.03.2022. She
further stated that she has not received any notice of hearing and the e-mail id
mentioned in the Income tax portal belongs to her Life Insurance Agent, and she
herself being out of the country was totally unaware of any such assessment
proceedings and was prevented from complying with the notices of hearing.
She has submitted copies of her passport as proof that she has entered the
country on 22.08.2022 and thereafter she managed to contact her lawyer and has filed
the appeal before the first appellate authority on 15.09.2022 (within one month of her
return) which is belatedly by 146 days.
Considering her explanation, we condone the delay of 146 days in absence of
any willful default or neglect on her part.
She further submitted a copy of Form No. 26AS and a computation of income
and the copy of the income tax return filed as evidence that the amount earned by her
amounting to Rs.9,16,995/- from surrender of Life Insurance Policy, has already been
offered for taxation and duly disclosed in her income tax return filed on 26.07.2016
4 I.T.A. No. 413/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 u/s 139(1). From the copy of computation of income and copy of Form 26AS
attached we find that that the said amount is duly reflected in the income tax portal
and the assessee has also disclosed the same in her return of income (originally filed)
and has also claimed refund of excess tax deducted at source.
The ld. DR after going through the documentary evidences has no objection if
the matter is set aside back to the files of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment,
after necessary verification.
We have heard the ld. DR and considered the materials on record and the
documentary evidences and the written submission filed by the assessee and we find
that in the instant case, it will be in the fitness of thing, if the matter is remanded back
to the files of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer for fresh assessment after
considering the return already filed u/s 139(1) where the entire income is already
disclosed vis-à-vis the information contained in Form No. 26AS and apparently it
seems that the said income has already been offered for taxation in her regular return
filed on 26.07.2016.
The AO is directed to verify the same and pass fresh order as per provisions of
law.
5 I.T.A. No. 413/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 13. The assessee may be allowed reasonable opportunity of being heard and
notices to be issued as per provisions of section 282 of the Act, along with a copy to
her advocate Mr. Puneet Misser in his e-mail id puneetmisser@yahoo.com .
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate
Tribunal) Rules, 1963 as on 22.09.2025
Sd/- Sd/- (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) (Udayan Dasgupta) Accountant Member Judicial Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T True Copy By Order
