DEEPAK FERUMAL DESARAJE,AMRAVATI V. ITO, WARD 1 , AMRAVATI

ITA 236/NAG/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Deepak Ferumal Desaraje against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi, which was passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2014-15. The appeal was initially delayed by 221 days due to the assessee's lack of familiarity with email communication and was only discovered upon receiving a physical notice for penalty proceedings. The Tribunal found the reasons for the delay in filing the first appeal, attributed to a change of consultant, insufficient and did not condone the delay, leading to the dismissal of the appeal in limine by the Commissioner. The Tribunal, however, noted the absence of an opportunity for the assessee to substantiate the delay before the Commissioner and thus remanded the case for a fresh decision on the limitation issue.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 773136 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURJIT KUMAR SAHA; LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: FILING AN
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH :: NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 236/NAG/2025 (Assessment Year : 2014-15) Deepak Ferumal Desaraje, Near Mithu Chakki, Rampuri Camp, Amravvati-444603. PAN: AFYPD 1982 M Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Amravati (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr.D.R. Date of Hearing : 25.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025 O R D E R This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 31/07/2024 impugned herein passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi (in short, ‘Ld. Commissioner’) u/sec. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘Act’) for the A.Y. 2014-15. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.236/NAG/2025 (Deepak Ferumal Desaraje) 2 2. Despite of sending notices for the date of hearing for 25/06/2025, the Assessee neither filed any adjournment application nor appeared and, therefore, this Court is inclined to decide this appeal as exparte qua Assessee. 3. At the outset, it is observed that there is a delay of 191 days in filing of the instant appeal, on which the Assessee by filing an application for condonation of delay along with duly sworn affidavit dated 13/03/2025 and affirming the reasons stated for condonation of delay, has claimed that he is not conversant of operating emails and also not having his own email ID. Somehow, in the month of March 2025, the Assessee came to know about the impugned order when a notice server from Income Tax Office served a physical notice of penalty proceedings at his home. Therefore, the Assessee immediately contacted his Counsel, who immediately filed the instant appeal, however with a delay of 221 days. The delay occurred was neither intentional nor malafide but because of the aforesaid reason and therefore, a lenient view may be taken. 4. On the contrary, learned Departmental Representative (DR) refuted the claim of the Assessee. 5. Considering the reasons stated by the Assessee which are supported with duly sworn affidavit, as genuine, bonafide and Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.236/NAG/2025 (Deepak Ferumal Desaraje) 3 unintentional, the delay of 191 days as pointed out by the Registry, is condoned. 6. Coming to the merits of the case, it is observed that there was also a delay of approximately four months in filing of first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner. Before the Ld. Commissioner in the appeal memo, Assessee has stated that due to change of consultant, the Assessee came to know about passing of assessment order. As the appeal period is over, the Assessee has filed appeal with delay. The Assessee has further prayed that delay may be condoned and the case be heard on merits. Ld.Commissioner by considering the reasons stated by the Assessee as insufficient cause, ultimately, dismissed the appeal of the Assessee in limine, without condoning the delay. 7. This Court has given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Admittedly, the Ld. Commissioner before passing the impugned order, did not issue any notice for giving opportunity to the Assessee to substantiate the delay occurred in filing of first appeal. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that justice would be met by remanding the case to the file of Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh on the limitation. The Assessee is also directed to file the relevant application along with affidavit in support of its Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.236/NAG/2025 (Deepak Ferumal Desaraje) 4 claim qua condonation of delay before the Ld. Commissioner. It is hereby clarified that in case of condoning the delay, the Ld. Commissioner shall decide the case on merits. 8. In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 23.09.2025 as per Rule 34(5) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. Sd/- (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY) JUDICIAL MEMBER vr/- Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Nagpur The DR Concerned Bench //True Copy// By Order Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur. Printed from counselvise.com "