SETTU D, VELLORE V. ITO,WARD-1, VELLORE

ITA 359/CHNY/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 102 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0035 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-11-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 07-11-2023
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 19-03-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause; Corroborative evidences; Condonation of delay; Set aside
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी वी. दुगाŊ राव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी मनोज कु मार अŤवाल, लेखा सद˟ के समƗ । Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.359/Chny/2023 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shri D. Settu, No. 107, Mullai Nagar, III Street, Bagayam, Vellore 632 002. Tamil Nadu. [PAN:AALPS3025L] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Vellore. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 08.11.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 10.11.2023 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Chennai, dated 29.03.2019 relevant to the assessment year 2008-09. 2. The appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by 1371 days in filing the appeal. The assessee filed condonation petition for the delay in support of an affidavit along with medical treatment details. In the affidavit, the assessee has stated as under: I.T.A. No. 359/Chny/23 2 The petitioner submits that he had been suffering from a series of health complications and admitted to Hospital at various points of time from 2017. In 2017, I was admitted in hospital for acute minor stroke and related problems. Since then, my movements completely restricted and require the assistance of a helper. In June 2019, I was again admitted in hospital for various health issues and discharged after receiving treatment. Later, in October 2020, I suffered from severe covid and other issues and was in hospital for nearly ten days. Then, in April 2021, I was admitted in hospital and surgery performed for axillary nerve injury and massive rotator cuff tear and left hemiparesis. In February 2023, a MRI was performed to diagnose a fresh health problem. I am now totally immobile and confined to bed. In the midst of continuous medical problems for me and frequent hospital visits and admissions, I could also not attend to the hearing before the CIT(A) and also lost track of the order received from the office of CIT(A). When the Tax Recovery Officer demanded the payment of the disputed tax, I sought professional advice. I was told by my auditor and well- wisher that the only possible solution is to file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. I obtained professional advice regarding the future course of action in the matter of filing appeal. Thereafter, my auditor took steps to prepare the appeal papers and send it across for my signature. Eventually, the appeal was e- filed on 07.12.2022 and physical copy sent by post on 18.3.2023. This resulted in a delay of 1371 days in filing the appeal. The petitioner submits that the delay was neither wilful nor wanton but due to circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. If the delay is not condoned and the appeal disposed off on merits, the assessee would be put to considerable hardship and injury. The condonation of delay and disposal of the appeal on merits would give an opportunity to the assessee to address the issue on merits and cancel the addition, which otherwise would be fastened on the assessee. 2.1 By referring the above petition for condonation of delay, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has explained actual cause for the delay in support of the medical treatment details and submitted that there is reasonable cause for the delay and the delay in filing the appeal is neither wilful nor wanton and prayed for condonation of delay and to admit the appeal for adjudication. 2.2 On the other hand, the ld. DR strongly opposed the condonation petition filed by the assessee. I.T.A. No. 359/Chny/23 3 2.3 We have heard both the sides, perused the petition for condonation of delay and also gone through the medical treatment details of the assessee. The assessee is an individual and an illiterate and he was under prolonged medical treatment as could be evident by the medical treatment reports filed by the assessee. Considering the reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal, we are of the opinion that the delay has to be condoned. Accordingly, the delay in filing of the appeal stands condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication subject to the condition that the assessee should pay ₹.10,000/- to the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court and produce necessary proof of payment of cost before the Registry of ITAT. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income for the assessment year 2008-09 on 30.09.2008 admitting total income of ₹.1,46,020/-. The Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] assessing total income of the assessee at ₹.81,12,687/-. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for the reason that there was no response from the assessee against various hearing notices issued for furnishing written submissions to controvert the findings of the Assessing Officer. I.T.A. No. 359/Chny/23 4 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. By relying upon the medical treatment details filed before the Tribunal, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that since the assessee was under medical treatment, he was unable to furnish any details before the ld. CIT(A) and prayed that one more opportunity may be afforded to substantiate his case. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR has submitted that the assessee was afforded various opportunities by the ld. CIT(A) by issuing various hearing notices. 6. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. During the course of appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT(A) has issued various notices of hearing. Since the assessee was ailing and produced medical treatment details before the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that the ld. CIT(A) shall grant one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee to substantiate his case with supporting evidence. Accordingly, we set aside the appellate order and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after allowing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee to substantiate his case with documentary evidence. I.T.A. No. 359/Chny/23 5 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 10 th November, 2023 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 10.11.2023 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF.