GHOUSEMUNAVARDEEN ZAINAB BANU,ANDALPURAM, MADURAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD 1(7), MADURAI, INCOME TAX OFFICE, CR BUILDING, MADURAI

ITA 1603/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ghousemunavardeen Zainab Banu, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2014-15. The primary issue was the delay in filing the appeal, which was attributed to the assessee's lack of awareness and digital literacy, as she was a housewife with no knowledge of email usage. The Assessing Officer had previously passed an ex parte order under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, adding a significant amount to the assessee's income as unexplained money from an investment in immovable property. The Tribunal found reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal and admitted it for adjudication, ultimately deciding to remit the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711789 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARV SREENIVASAN
• Assessee Lawyers: T.VASUDEVAN
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144; 50C

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,‘डी’ Ûयायपीठ,चेÛनई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी जॉजŊ जॉजŊ क े, उपाȯƗ एवं ŵी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.:1603/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ghousemunavardeen Zainab Banu, B-10, Varapradha, Agrini Andalpuram, Madurai– 625 003. vs. ITO, Non-Corp Ward -1(7), Madurai. [PAN:AAQPZ-2950-E] (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. T. Vasudevan, Advocate. ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Mr. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 23.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 24.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, AM : This appeal by the assessee is filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2014-15, vide order dated 29.01.2024. 2. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 426 days in appeal filed by the assessee, for which the assessee has filed affidavit stating the reasons for delay, wherein, it is submitted that the assessee was unaware of the order of the ld.CIT(A) being a housewife having no knowledge of digital literacy and Email usage. When the assessee requested the AO to keep the penalty proceedings in abeyance till the Printed from counselvise.com :-2-: ITA. No:1603/Chny/2025 disposal of the appeal, the AO issued a letter dated 14.02.2025 that there was no pending appeal and further the department informed the assessee over phone in the last week of February 2025 that the appeal filed by the assessee was already dismissed. Thereafter, the assessee with the help of the auditor found that the appeal had been dismissed and immediately taken steps to file the present appeal. After considering the Affidavit filed by the assessee and also hearing both the parties, we find that there is a reasonable cause for the assessee in not filing appeal on or before the due date prescribed under the law and thus, in the interests of justice, we condone delay in filing of appeal and admit the appeal filed by the assessee for adjudication. 3. Brief facts are that the assessee is an individual had not filed her return of income for the AY 2014-15. As per the information available with the department found that assessee had purchased an immovable property at Madurai District along with three other co-purchasers for a consideration of Rs.1,00,00,000/- on 11.12.2013 and hence the case was reopened u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and accordingly statutory notices were issued to the assessee. However, assessee had not responded for any of the notices. Therefore, show-cause notices dated 19.06.2019 and 28.11.2019 were issued upon the assessee. However, as the assessee failed to comply to the aforesaid notices issued from time to time. The AO concluded the assessment by passing an exparte order u/s.144 of the Act by adding the amount of Rs.26,04,248/- of 25% of the investment on immovable property (value as per section 50C of the act of Rs.1,04,16,995/-) to the total income for the year under consideration u/s.69 of the Act as unexplained money. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi. Printed from counselvise.com :-3-: ITA. No:1603/Chny/2025 5. Before the ld.CIT(A) also, the assessee has neither filed written submissions nor filed any documentary evidence in support of his claim, in spite 7 opportunities provided by the ld.CIT(A) as per para 3 of its order from 05.01.2021 to 05.01.2024. Therefore, the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by confirming the order of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before us. 6. The ld.AR submitted that the assessee has not received notices issued by the ld.CIT(A). Hence, the appeal was not prosecuted before the ld.CIT(A) even the assessment order was passed exparte u/s. 144 of the Act by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, ld.AR prayed for one more opportunity may be provided to the assessee to represent his case before the Assessing Officer in the interest of natural justice. Further, the ld.AR assured the bench that he will undertake to represent on behalf of the assessee before the AO, in case one more opportunity is provided. 7. Per contra, the ld.DR submitted that both the Assessing Officer and the ld.CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunity to appear before them. However, the assessee has been negligent in responding to the statutory notices and hence, prayed for confirming the order of the ld.CIT(A). 8. We have heard the rival parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the lower authorities. We note that the Assessing Officer has passed an exparte order by considering the information available with the department and the same has been dismissed by the ld.CIT(A) - NFAC due to non-participation of the assessee before the first appellate authority. 9. In view of the above and to meet the ends of justice we set aside the order of ld.CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer and direct the AO to Printed from counselvise.com :-4-: ITA. No:1603/Chny/2025 denovo frame the assessment order in accordance to law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee to be diligent and file written submissions and relevant documents if advised so. 10. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the court on 24th July, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (जॉजŊ जॉजŊ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाȯƗ /VICE PRESIDENT (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (S. R. RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सद˟/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चेɄई/Chennai, िदनांक/Dated, the 24th July, 2025 SP आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent 3.आयकर आयुƅ/CIT– Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF Printed from counselvise.com "