Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's assessment for AY 2017-18 was completed u/s 143(3). Subsequently, the PCIT passed an ex-parte order u/s 263, revising the assessment. The assessee appealed this order to the ITAT with a significant delay.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 1181-day delay in filing the appeal, citing the assessee's illiteracy and ignorance of tax law and procedure. It then remanded the case back to the PCIT for fresh adjudication, directing that the assessee be given an opportunity to be heard.
Key Issues
The key legal issues were the condonation of an inordinate delay in filing an appeal and the validity of an ex-parte order passed by the PCIT under Section 263 without providing an opportunity of being heard.
Sections Cited
Section 143(3), Section 263
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH, DEHRADUN
Before: SH. YOGESH KUMAR US & SH. MANISH AGARWAL
ORDER
PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- Bareilly [‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short] dated 31/03/2021 for the Assessment Year 2017-18.
There is a delay of 1181 days in filing the present Appeal. The Assessee filed an application for condonation contending that the Assessee is an illiterate, does not have the knowledge of the tax law.
Further submitted that the Assessee had filed Appeal before the NFAC against the second assessment order, however, came to know that as against the order passed u/s 263 of the Act, Appeal has to be filed before the Tribunal and not before the NFAC and the delay caused due to the ignorance of the Assessee on the tax law and procedure, thus sought for condoning the delay in filing the present Appeal.
Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that, there is no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay, thus sought for dismissal of the present Appeal on delay in latches.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record on the issue of delay in filing the present Appeal.
The Assessee in the application for condonation of delay, contended that she is an illiterate, does not have the knowledge of the tax law.
Further submitted that the Assessee had filed Appeal before the NFAC against the second assessment order, however, came to know that as against the order passed u/s 263 of the Act Appeal has to be filed before the Tribunal and the delay caused due to the ignorance of tax law and procedure.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the Appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay. In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that the delay when supported by justifiable reasons, must make way for the cause of substantial justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 1,181 days in filing the present Appeal subject to Assessee depositing a sum of Rs. 2,000/- to Prime Minister National Relief Fund.
Brief facts of the case are that, Assessment for Assessment Year 2017-18 was completed on 16/12/2019 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) at returned income of Rs. 7,24,450/-. The case of the Assessee was selected for Complete Scrutiny through CASS on the issue of cash deposit of during the demonetization period. An ex-parte order u/s 263 of the Act came to be passed on 20/03/2021 by the Ld. PCIT as the Assessee failed to file any reply to the notice issued by the Ld. PCIT. Aggrieved by the order of the PCIT dated 20/03/2021, Assessee preferred the present Appeal.
The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the order impugned has been passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte, therefore, sought for remanding the issue to the file of the Ld. PCIT for deciding the issue afresh.
Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative relying on the order of the Ld. PCIT,sought for dismissal of the appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order impugned, the Ld.
PCIT passed ex-parte order u/s 263 of the Act. As the Ld. Assessee's Representative requested for remanding the issue to the file of the Ld.
PCIT for fresh adjudication, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the pass afresh order u/s 263 of the Act by providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. The Assessee is also directed to participate in the proceedings before the Ld. PCIT.
In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 21/01/2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 21/01/2026 *R.N , Sr. PS*