KULWANT KAUR,JAIPUR V. ITO WD 4(2), JAIPUR

ITA 539/JPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Kulwant Kaur against orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2011-12. The appeals were initially time-barred, with delays of 246 and 765 days, respectively. The Tribunal considered the genuine hardships and unavoidable circumstances cited by the assessee, including the ill health of her husband, who managed their taxation compliance and was suffering from multiple serious health issues. The Tribunal found sufficient 'reasonable cause' for the delays and admitted the appeals for adjudication. The main issues in the appeals pertained to an addition made in the assessment order under section 147 of the Income-tax Act and a penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to appear before the CIT(A) and the lack of documentary evidence to support the grounds of appeal, attributing this to the ongoing health issues of her husband and their residence in Australia.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 713171 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM SINGH CHOUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: ANOOP BHATIA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCHES “SMC”, JAIPUR BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.539 and 540/JPR/2025 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Kulwant Kaur 196 A, AWHO Colony, Ambabari, Jaipur-302023, Rajasthan PAN: ASUPK9063H Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2), Jaipur Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER The captioned appeals at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2011-12 are directed against the separate orders dated 21.12.2022 and 17.05.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC) Delhi u/s 250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961. 2. Registry has informed that the appeals before this Tribunal are time barred by 246 and 765 days respectively. Application for condonation of delay has been placed on record. Since the contents of the applications are same, condonation application filed by the assessee for ITA No.539/JPR/2025 is reproduced below : “In the present case the 1, Mrs. Kulwant Kaur, is the wife of Shri Hari Singh who is a war patron and retired personnel of the Indian Armed Forces who has been impacted by war-related disabilities. Both, the appellant and her husband are currently Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) residing in Australia with their children. Appellant by : Shri Anoop Bhatia Respondent by : Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary Date of hearing : 01.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 29.07.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.539 and 540/JPR/2025 Kulwant Kaur 2 The impugned order under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was passed by the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)NFAC on 21/12/2022, and the statutory period for filing the appeal before this Hon'ble Tribunal expired on 19/02/2023 and there has been a delay of 765 days in filing the present appeal which is neither deliberate nor intentional but solely due to the genuine and unavoidable circumstances explained herein below. 1. That Shri Hari Singh (my husband), was primarily managing all my taxation compliance related aspects. However, since last few years, he has been unwell and suffering from multiple serious health issues, including memory loss, heart-related ailments, and other complications etc. In this regard, I'm hereby enclosing a medical certificate issued by his doctor in Australia for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Bench. 2. That since I am not updated regarding ongoing appellate proceedings more so due to the ill health of my husband I neither have any idea about any kind of notices issued and subsequently appellate order passed by income tax authorities nor I received any communication thereof. 3. That the delay in filing this appeal is purely circumstantial, without any malafide intent or negligence on my part. 4. In view of the genuine hardships and unavoidable circumstances beyond my control, it is prayed that the delay in filing the appeal may kindly be condoned, and the matter may be decided on merits in the interest of natural justice.” 3. After hearing both the sides and going through the averments made in the condonation applications by the assessee, I find that due to 'reasonable cause' assessee failed to file the appeals within the stipulated time limit. Having regard to the facts of the instant case, I condone the delay of 246 and 765 days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals for adjudication in light of judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.539 and 540/JPR/2025 Kulwant Kaur 3 4. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the appeal ITA No.540/JPR/2025 is against the addition made in the assessment order passed u/s.147 of the Act for A.Y. 2011-12 and ITA No.539/JPR/2025 is against the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. He fairly admitted that assessee failed to appear before ld.CIT(A) and could not furnish any details and documentary evidence in support of grounds of appeal regarding the quantum addition as well as against the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Ac. He submitted that the main reason for non-compliance is that the husband of the assessee who is a retired personnel of the Indian Armed force is not keeping good health for a long time and currently both the husband and assessee are residing in Australia with their children. Due to this reason, details could not be compiled and filed before the lower authorities. Therefore, prayer made to restore back all the issues regarding to quantum as well as penalty to the file of ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. Ld. Departmental Representative did not oppose this request. 5. Under these given facts and circumstances, I in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, remit all the issues raised in the instant appeals to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is at liberty to adduce all the required submissions/evidences before ld.CIT(A) to substantiate the case. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.539 and 540/JPR/2025 Kulwant Kaur 4 remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned orders are set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 29th day of July, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Jaipur; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 29th July, 2025. Satish आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब\u0014च, Jaipur / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Jaipur 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Jaipur Printed from counselvise.com "