Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a significant delay, attributing it to the demise of her husband and subsequent health issues. The core issue on merit was that the assessment order was passed ex parte under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act without providing a fair opportunity of hearing.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to the genuine hardship faced by the assessee. On merits, considering the principles of natural justice and the ex parte assessment, the Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for readjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the ex parte assessment order passed without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing is valid and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 69
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY
Assessee represented by Shri Akshay Ringasiya, A.R. Department represented by Shri Kailash Gautam, Sr.DR Date of hearing 28/01/2026 Date of pronouncement 20/02/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 13/03/2024 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 as per the grounds of appeal on record.
2. We found from perusal of the record that there is a delay of 286 days in filing this appeal before this Tribunal, for which a petition for condonation of delay in the form of affidavit was filed by the assessee mentioning the fact that the delay was caused due to demise of husband of the assessee in the year 2023, due to which, the assessee was in a state of deep emotional distress and physical frailty. The assessee stated that due to deteriorating health, she Charanjeet Kaur Vs ITO was unable to follow up the status of the legal proceedings, in support of which, the assessee submitted doctor's prescription. The assessee further stated that the order of the ld. CIT(A) was passed on 13/03/2024. However, due to ignorance of law, the lack of support due to husband's death and the assessee's health problem, she was completely unaware of the issuance of the order of ld. CIT(A). When recovery proceedings were initiated by the department and notice in this regard has been received, then she contacted the consultant and filed the present appeal. The delay was not intentional and deliberate and beyond the control of the assessee and prayed that the delay may be condoned. The ld. Sr.DR did not raise any serious objections. Therefore, considering the contents made in the condonation petition and after perusal of the death certificate of the assessee's husband and the doctor's prescription, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal.
3. On merit of the case, the learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that that the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order ex parte without giving fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the Assessing Officer made additions under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) without giving fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessment was completed on 29/03/2022 under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The ld. AR of the assessee Charanjeet Kaur Vs ITO submits that the assessee has good case on merit and is likely to succeed if one more opportunity is provided and prayed to restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for readjudication on merit. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that he states on behalf of assessee to be more vigilant in future in making compliance.
On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr.DR) supported the orders of the revenue authorities.
We have carefully considered the submissions of the both the parties and have gone through the orders of the lower authorities. We find that the Assessing Officer completed the assessment ex parte under Section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act on 29/03/2022. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that no fair and reasonable opportunities of hearing were provided to the assessee before the Assessing Officer. The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that one more opportunity should be provided to assessee and to decide the matter on merit. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the matter is restored to the file of Assessing Officer considering the fact that assessment was completed under section 144 of the Act, to pass assessment order afresh in accordance with law. Needless to direct that before passing the order, the Assessing Officer shall grant reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to avail this opportunity and not to cause further delay and seek adjournment without any valid reasons and to furnish all the details and evidences to justify various grounds of appeal Charanjeet Kaur Vs ITO raised by her. In the result, the grounds of appeal
raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
6. In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. Order announced in open court on 20th February, 2026.