Rupa Milton Dey, Surat V. ITO Ward 2(3)(4), Surat, Surat

ITA 293/SRT/2023

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Rupa Milton Dey against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which had dismissed her appeal in limine for being filed beyond the permissible period. The assessee's husband, who managed her tax matters, faced criminal charges and was under significant stress, which contributed to the delay. The ITAT found sufficient cause for the delay and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination of the cash credit of Rs. 15,57,652 in the assessee's account.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 301567 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 29-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 26-04-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, Indian Penal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Reasonable cause
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH (SMC), SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 293/Srt/2023 (Assessment Year 2011-12) (Physical hearing) Rupa Milton Dey, C-103, Akash Bhumi Apartment, Jayvir Co-Op Society, Pandesara, Surat. PAN No. AKAPD 9422 B Vs. I.T.O., Ward-2(3)(4), Surat. Appellant/ assessee Respondent/ revenue Assessee represented by Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA Department represented by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Institution of Appeal 27/04/2023 Date of hearing 30/05/2023 Date of pronouncement 30/05/2023 Order under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short, the ld. CIT(A)) dated 02/02/2023 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The ld. CIT(A) has erred and was not just and proper on the facts of the case and in law in dismissing the appeal in limine and not condoning the delay in filing the appeal.. 2. Prayer 2.1 The delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) may kindly be condoned. 2.2 Personal hearing may be granted. 2.3 Any other relief that your honours may deem fir may be granted. 3. The assessee craves leave to add, amend, modify alter or delete any of the grounds at the time of hearing.” ITA No. 293/Srt/2023 Rupa Milton Dey Vs ITO 2 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, vary and/or withdraw any or all the above grounds of appeal.” 2. At the outset of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee in limine by taking a view that the assessee filed appeal beyond 70 days of period of limitation. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee has filed her affidavit for explaining the reasons of delay. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that during the assessment proceedings, certain police complaint was made by various persons against her husband. Her husband used to look after the taxation matter of assessee. On the complaint of such persons, First Information Report (FIR) was registered and the assessee and her husband under section 406/420/506 of Indian Penal Code (IPC). The assessee and her husband were running to avoid the arrest and to manage the bail. Ultimately on 01/01/2019, the husband of assessee was allowed bail and after releasing of stress, her husband initiated action for filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The assessment order was passed on 12/11/2018, however, the appeal before the ld. CIT(A)/First Appellate Authority was filed on 20/02/2019, thus, there was a delay in filing appeal. The delay in filing appeal was neither intentional nor deliberate. The assessee has no intention to file appeal belatedly. The delay occurred for the reasons that the assessee and her husband were facing mental tension and apprehension of arrest. The assessee has good case on merit and is likely to succeed had the delay been condoned. The ITA No. 293/Srt/2023 Rupa Milton Dey Vs ITO 3 ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal unadmitted by rejecting the plea of assessee for condoning the delay. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that even the assessee could not file requisite details before the Assessing Officer, therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored back to the file of Assessing Officer to explain the cash credit of Rs. 15,57,652/- in the account of assessee. 3. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue submits that the assessee is habitual in not appearing before the Assessing Officer as well as no compliance was made before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. Sr.DR submits that he supports the orders of lower authorities. 4. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the record carefully. I find that alongwith affidavit, the ld. AR of assessee has filed copy of FIR No. 1/477/201 dated 12/12/2018 with Police Station Salabatpura, Surat, wherein the husband of assessee was made accused for the offence under Sections 406, 420, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code. The assessee has also filed order of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Surat dated 01/01/2019 for grating bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C). Considering the fact that husband of assessee who allegedly used to look after the taxation matter was facing criminal charges during the period when the assessment order and the period of filing appeal. Admittedly, the husband of assessee obtained order under ITA No. 293/Srt/2023 Rupa Milton Dey Vs ITO 4 Section 438 of Cr.P.C. only on 01.012019 against his arrest, and appeal before ld CIT(A) was filed on 20.02.2019, therefore, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the assessee has shown sufficient and reasonable cause for delay in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Thus, such delay in filing appeal is condoned. 5. On merit, I find that the ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the matter on merit, even assessment order was passed under section 144 as the assessee has not given any explanation before the Assessing officer about the source of cash deposit/credit in her bank account, therefore I deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer to examine the issue afresh. The assessee is directed to be more vigilant in future and to make timely compliance and file necessary evidence regarding the source of cash deposit/credit in her bank account and not to seek adjournment without any valid reason. Hence, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only. 6. In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. Order announced in open court on 30 th May, 2023 at the time of hearing. Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER Surat, Dated: 30/05/2023 *Ranjan ITA No. 293/Srt/2023 Rupa Milton Dey Vs ITO 5 Copy to: 1. Assessee – 2. Revenue – 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard File By order Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Surat