RAJKUMARI,GHAZIABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GHAZIABAD

From the perusal of the appellate order, it is found that Ld. CIT(A) has not admitted the appeal as the appeal was filed delay by 192 days before the Ld. CIT(A). The reasons given by the assessee is that she is illiterate and is not familiar with internet and has no knowledge about e-portal of income tax department. It is claimed by assessee that Ld. CIT(A) issued notices which were not received and they were uploaded at the portal of the Department, however, the assessee was not aware of the proceedings as she is an agriculturist and is not well versed with information technology, therefore, the necessary compliance could not be made either before the AO or before the CIT(A). He thus prayed that the matter may be sent back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication.

Per contra, the Ld. Sr. DR has not objected to the request of the assessee.

After considering the arguments, we find that in the instant case, the assessee being not much “Educated” and was grossly unaware of technologically of newly High-Tech “E- Proceedings” including “Faceless Proceedings” and E-mails-working on Portal of computers, therefore, due compliance could not be made before the lower authorities. Under these circumstances, in the interest of justice, delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and one more opportunities is given to the assessee and both the appeals are remitted back to the file of the AO with direction to decide the issues denovo afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to participate in Rajkumari vs. ITO proceedings before the AO. With these directions, the grounds of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.