Sunita Devi, New Delhi V. ITO,ward-4(3), Gurgaon

ITA 46/DEL/2023

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Sumita Devi against the orders of the Income Tax Officer and the CIT(A), which were passed ex parte. The assessee, a senior citizen suffering from chronic illnesses, was unable to file her appeal within the prescribed time due to her health issues. The ITAT considered the medical evidence provided and the legal precedent set by the Supreme Court in Concord India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Nirmala Devi, which supported the assessee's claim of sufficient cause for the delay. The Tribunal decided to remand the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 131282 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 04-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 04-01-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Concord India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Nirmala Devi reported in 118 ITR 507 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

Page | 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE Shri C.M. Garg, Judicial Member ITA No. 46/Del/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sumita Devi, 20/3, DLF Ogase-3, Gurgaon, Haryana Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AKNPD9287H Assessee by : Sh. Raghav Sharma, CA Shri P. C. Yadav, Adv Revenue by: Shri Sumesh Swani, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05/04/2023 Date of pronouncement 09/05/2023 O R D E R PER C. M. GARG, J. M.: 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 18.05.2022 for AY 2017-18. 2. The application of assessee seeking condonation of delay of 169 days. The assessee’s representative (AR) submitted that the assessee is a senior citizen suffering from chronic diseases like migraine, P/V bleeding etc therefore, the assessee was unable to obtain expert opinion in respect of first appellate order dated 18.05.2020. The ld AR submitted that specifically the assessee consulted advocate Shri Ravi Gupta and filed appeal before the Tribunal by a delay of 169 days which was caused due to medical reasons which was beyond control of the assessee. Placing reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Concord India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Nirmala Devi reported in 118 ITR 507 (SC), the ld AR submitted that the circumstances stated in the Page | 2 application supported by an affidavit dated 25.02.2023 it is clear that there were sufficient cause for the assessee which prevented her from filing appeal within the prescribed time limit and thus, it was filed appeal belatedly by 169 days therefore delay may kindly be condoned. 3. Replying to the above ld Sr. DR strongly opposed to the condonation of delay. 4. On careful consideration of the above submission I note that the assessee has filed an affidavit and medical certificate and prescription issued by Dr. SP Vij which reveals that the assessee was suffering from severe chronic diseases. In view of the above, keeping in view the fact that the assessee is a lady aged about 53 years is suffering from chronic diseases therefore, it is obvious that she could not get appropriate advice to file appeal before this Tribunal within prescribed time limit therefore, the cause shown by the assessee is sufficient cause explaining the delay. Therefore, respectfully following the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Concord India Insurance Co. ltd (supra) the delay of 169 days in filing appeal before this Tribunal is condone, appeal is admitted for hearing. 5. Pressing into services ground Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of ld AR submitted that the AO has passed an assessment order u/s 144 of the Act and the ld CIT(A) has also passed ex parte order and dismissed the appeal of the assessee expartedly without adjudicating the grounds of appeal raised in Form No. 35 therefore, the matter may be remanded to the file of AO for fresh adjudication. 6. Replying to the above ld Sr. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below however, the ld SR. DR on all fairness submitted that if it is found just and proper then the department has no serious objection if the matter be restored to the file of the ld AO for de novo framing of assessment order. Page | 3 7. On careful consideration of the above submission, I am of the view that while deciding the condonation petition of assessee it has already observed that the assessee was suffering with chronic diseases and therefore, he could not file appeal within prescribed time limit and this cause was continuous and thus was continuously persisting in the life of the assessee which resulted into ex parte assessment as well as ex parte first appellate order. I am humbly understand the assessee should be allowed to submit explanation and relevant documentary evidence on the issue raised by the AO in the scrutiny assessment order in the interest of justice. Therefore, the matter is restored to file of AO for de novo framing of assessment order with a direction that the AO shall pass assessment order after allowing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee and without being influenced with the earlier assessment and first appellate order. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 09/05/2023. -Sd/- (C. M. GARG) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 09/05/2023 A K Keot Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi