GANGADHAR,ALIAGRH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALIGARH
Facts
The assessee, deceased, did not file an income tax return for AY 2012-13. The Income Tax Officer initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147/148 of the Act based on information about the sale of an immovable property. A best judgment assessment under section 144 was made.
Held
The Tribunal noted the assessee's delay in filing the appeal due to the death of the assessee and lack of knowledge by the legal representative. While the assessee's non-responsive conduct led to ex-parte orders, the Tribunal decided to condone the delay and the delay in appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the lower authorities violated the principles of natural justice, and if the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 144, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 199/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13
Gangadhar (deceased) through Vs. Income-tax Officer, Legal heir Satish Chand, Ward 1(3), Aligarh. Kasimpur Ka Nagla, Kasimpur, Aligarh (UP) PAN : BFZPG6605L (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by Sh. Avan Kumar Singh, CA Department by Sh. Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Date of hearing 19.08.2025 Date of pronouncement 29.08.2025
ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal has been filed on behalf of the assessee, Gangadhar (deceased) through legal representative, Shri Satish Chand against the
impugned order dated 07.06.2023 passed in Appeal No. CIT (A) Aligarh/10027/2018-19 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as
“the Act”) for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. At the very outset, we notice through registry report that this appeal was filed on 11.04.2025 against the impugned order dated 07.06.2023 by a
ITA No.199/Agr/2025
delay of about 613 days. Ld. AR has submitted, in accordance with the
contents of delay condonation application, that the assessee died on
11.05.2021 and the legal representative of the deceased assessee had no
knowledge of the impugned order. The legal representative came to know
about the same when demand notice was received. An affidavit has also
been filed in support of the delay condonation application. In the
circumstances and in the interest of justice, we condone the delay.
Brief facts state that the assessee did not file return of income for
A.Y. 2012-13. According to the information available with the department,
the appellant was found to have sold immovable property for
Rs.1,21,36,800/-, stamp value of which, according to the government
valuation, was Rs.93,36,800/-. Case was reopened u/s. 147 and notice u/s.
148 of the Act was issued. The appellant assessee did neither respond nor
file any return of income in response thereof. Learned Assessing Officer,
thus carried out ‘best judgment assessment’ u/s. 144 of the Act by
computing long term capital gain on sale of immovable property and
assessed total income at Rs.78,61,690/-.
Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before ld. CIT(Appeals),
who dismissed assessee’s appeal ex parte.
2 | P a g e
ITA No.199/Agr/2025
This second appeal has been filed on the ground, in addition to
others, that the impugned ex parte order has been passed without affording
proper opportunity of hearing in violation of the principles of natural justice.
Perused the records and heard learned AR for assessee and learned
DR for revenue.
Learned AR submitted that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has passed exparte
impugned order without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the
assessee in gross violation of the principles of natural justice.
Learned DR supported the orders of the authorities below.
It transpires from the perusal of the assessment record that due to
irresponsive conduct of the assessee learned Assessing Officer was
compelled to pass best judgment assessment u/s. 144 of the Act. Similarly,
ld. CIT(Appeals) was also compelled to pass ex parte impugned order due
to non-submission on behalf of the assessee despite various notices dated
24.02.2021, 09.07.2021, 13.08.2021 and 18.05.2023 issued to the
appellant through ITBA Portal. Such an irresponsive conduct of the
assessee is unacceptable, however, in the totality of facts and
circumstances and in the interest of justice, we deem it just and proper to
afford an opportunity to the appellant assessee to make his submissions
before the Assessing Officer. The matter is thus remitted back to the file of
Assessing Officer for passing order afresh in accordance with law after 3 | P a g e
ITA No.199/Agr/2025
taking assessee’s submissions into consideration. We further deem it just
and appropriate to observe that learned Assessing Officer shall take notice
of the fact of the death of the assessee, treating the assessment through
legal representative of the deceased assessee. We order accordingly.
Needless to say that learned Assessing Officer shall ensure the
observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be
allowed accordingly.
In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. The impugned
order dated 07.06.2023 stands set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29.08.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (M. BALAGANESH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.08.2025 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra
4 | P a g e
