JAWAHAR BHARATHI,BANGALORE vs. ITO, WARD-1, PUDUCHERRY

At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that even though, there was a delay of 385 days while filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), and despite, there was reasonable cause for the condonation of delay, the Ld.CIT(A) didn’t condone the delay and dismissed the appeal

(AY 2011-12) Jawahar Bharathi :: 2 :: without going in to the merits of the appeal. Explaing the reason for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld CIT(A), the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee was not aware of the Assessment Order [best judgment assessment] passed on 03.12.2018 u/s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter in short "of the Act") since, the notices issued by the AO was at the earlier address of assessee at Pondicherry, whereas, assessee had shifted to Bangalore, which fact according to Ld AR is evident from perusal of Form No.35 [filed before the Ld.CIT(A)] as well as Form No.36 filed before us. Therefore, according to Ld AR, assessee was in the dark regarding framing of Assessment Order and only when the bank account of the assessee was attached, he found out on 26.12.2019 about the ex- parte income tax order/Assessment Order ; and immediately thereafter, filed appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). However, the Ld.CIT(A) without appreciating the facts have not condoned the delay. We do not countenance the impugned action of the Ld.CIT(A). We find from the perusal of Form No.36 & Form No.35 that assessee’s present address is Jawahar Bharathi, No.3723 RD Cross, Maruthi Nagar, North Bangalore, Karnataka-560 064 [Phone No.96500 11368 & e-mail ID: tmskrl@yahoo.com] and in the Assessment Order the earlier address of assessee was shown at Pondicherry and the AO notes that the notices issued couldn’t be served. Therefore, we find that there was reasonable cause for the assessee not receiving the notices/Assessment Order dated

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.