Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A) order with a delay of 735 days, citing severe medical ailments including kidney problems and throat tumors since 2017. The CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order due to the assessee's non-compliance. The assessee also highlighted that his bank account was attached, causing extreme financial hardship.
Held
The tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to the assessee's severe medical condition and lack of communication from his previous counsel. It set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de novo adjudication, emphasizing the principles of natural justice and a humanitarian approach.
Key Issues
The key legal issues were the condonation of a significant delay in filing an appeal due to medical reasons and the validity of an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without proper consideration of the assessee's circumstances.
Sections Cited
Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY
आदेश / ORDER
PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM
The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 29.11.2023 for the assessment year 2017-18 as per the grounds of appeal on record.
At the very outset, it is noted that the appeal is time barred by 735 days. That explaining the reasons of the said delay, the assessee has filed condonation petition and affidavit, dated 05.02.2026 a/w. medical certificates. The assessee who appeared himself submitted that from 2017 onwards, he is suffering from various medical ailments, due to which, the said delay has occurred. The relevant contents of the said affidavit are extracted as follows:
Per contra, the Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the appellate order was passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC on 29.11.2023 and there was substantial delay of 4 years (approx.) in filing appeal from the period as claimed by the assessee in his affidavit. However, it is understood that the 4 Vinod Kushwaha Vs. ITO, Ward-Jagdalpur (C.G.)
(tumor) during the period 2017-2019.
I have heard the submissions of the parties herein and perused all the documents placed on record. It was submitted by the assessee that he is suffering from kidney problem. That further twice he was operated for tumor inside his throat. The assessee has also annexed all the medical certificates a/w. the affidavit. Considerably due to the continuous medical ill-heath condition, the assessee could not communicate with the erstwhile counsel whose email id was provided in Form 35 and the erstwhile counsel had also not communicated to the assessee regarding passing of the appellate order. I am of the considered view that it is within the purview of human probability, due to such severe ill-heath, the assessee could not follow up the matter with his counsel regarding passing of the appellate order. Consequent thereto, the said delay of 735 days has occurred in filing of this appeal. The Revenue has not brought on record any evidence suggesting deliberate or malafide conduct on the part of the assessee for this delay. Considering the judicial pronouncements viz. (i) Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors, reported in 167 ITR 471 (SC); (ii) Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Civil Appeal Nos……………../2025 [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 26310-26311/2024, dated 31.01.2025; (iii) Jagdish Prasad Singhania Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Raipur
5 Vinod Kushwaha Vs. ITO, Ward-Jagdalpur (C.G.)
(C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 and (iv) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025, the said delay of 735 days is condoned and the matter is heard on merits.
In so far as merits of the matter are concerned, it is noted that as evident from Page 1 & 2 of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC’s order, an ex-parte order has been passed by the said authority due to non-compliance by the assessee. The relevant observations of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC are extracted as follows: “Further, the fresh Notice u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were issued to the assessee as per the chart mentioned below: Notice to the assessee Date of hearing Remarks 23.02.2021 02.03.2021 No reply 08.09.2023 18.09.2023 No reply 19.09.2023 26.09.2023 No reply 02.11.2023 10.11.2023 No reply However, no reply has been received from the assessee. Under the circumstances the appeal is hereby decided on merits on the basis of material of facts, Grounds of appeal replies filed in earlier submission and other material placed on record.”
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Bench had provided one final opportunity to the assessee to represent the matter on merits
6 Vinod Kushwaha Vs. ITO, Ward-Jagdalpur (C.G.)
First Appellate Authority and had accordingly remanded the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC relying on the decision of the ITAT, “Division Bench”, Raipur in the cases of Brajesh Singh Bhadoria Vs. Dy./ACIT, Central Circle-2, Naya Raipur, IT(SS)A Nos. 1 to 6, 8 & 9/RPR/2025, dated 20.03.2025. However, in the present case, the assessee himself had appeared and submitted that from 2017 onwards, he is suffering from various medical ailment as also affirmed by him in his affidavit filed on record. He has also filed medical certificates demonstrating the truthfulness of his condition. That at the same time, the Revenue had attached his bank account, for which, he has submitted that he was unable to meet his day to day expenses and that he is finding it difficult to live. He had also stated in the open court that if the bank account is not released, in such circumstance, he would not be able to live. He had submitted that post operation of tumor and since at present both his kidney are damaged, he is constantly under medical supervision and medicines are required every day for which he is unable to pay any money for his medical treatments and food. In this regard, the Bench has directed the Ld. Sr. DR to take up the matter with the Pr. CIT and had suggested to the assessee to make a separate application altogether on this aspect and present it before the Department through proper assistance from the Ld. Sr. DR. Considering these facts and circumstances on record, this Bench finds the present case suitable to 7 Vinod Kushwaha Vs. ITO, Ward-Jagdalpur (C.G.) write this order as an exception to the principle of consistency regarding remanding the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and instead for the present assessee before me. I, therefore, set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and remand the matter to the file of A.O to pass denovo order as per law complying with the principles of natural justice.
That once this matter is remanded to the file of A.O for denovo adjudication, the present demand raised in the hands of the assessee through the earlier assessment order becomes non-est. The A.O shall accordingly provide appeal effect of this order. Before parting, this Bench as well suggests to the Income Tax Department with belief and conviction of such compliance by them to be more humanitarian and considerate in its approach to consider practical difficulties of an assessee tax payer before resorting to strictest of measures as per law. After all, our Constitution guarantees the Fundamental Right to live as per Article 21 to all citizens of this country.
As per the above terms grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 25th day of February, 2026.