MOHAMMAD ASHADULLAH,KOLKATA V. ITO, WARD-3(5), SAHIBGANJ

ITA 18/RAN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Mohammad Ashadullah against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, which dismissed his appeal as barred by limitation for the assessment year 2016-17. The assessee's appeal was initially delayed by 387 days due to his and his parents' health issues. The Assessing Officer had previously passed an assessment order under sections 147 and 144B of the Income Tax Act due to non-compliance with notices. The Tribunal considered the circumstances of the assessee's health and his parents' health as a reasonable cause for the delay and directed the CIT(A) to condone the delay and reconsider the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 717146 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 15-01-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PER BENCH; KHUBCHANDT PANDYA; LD
• Assessee Lawyers: SUJOY SEN; GAURAV CHOUDHARY; ARS
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause; Period of limitation
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE S/ RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mohammad Ashadullah, Garalli (Pahargaon), Udhwa Rajmahal, Sahibganj 816108 PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Assessee by Revenue by Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 16/10186929 for the assessment year 2. Shri Sujoy Sen & Shri Gaurav Choudhary, ARs assessee. Shri Khubchand T Pandya revenue. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI S/HRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.18/RAN/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Mohammad Ashadullah, Garalli (Pahargaon), Udhwa Rajmahal, Sahibganj- Vs. The Assessing Officer, NFAC, Delhi .AXAPA 5180 G (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sujoy Sen & Shri Gaurav Choudhary, ARs Revenue by : Shri Khubchand T Pandya, ld Sr DR Date of Hearing : 19/08/202 Date of Pronouncement : 19/08/2 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 6.11.2024 in Appeal No.CIT(A), for the assessment year 2016-17. Shri Sujoy Sen & Shri Gaurav Choudhary, ARs appeared for the Khubchand T Pandya, ld Sr DR represented on behalf of the P a g e 1 | 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The Assessing Officer, Respondent) Sujoy Sen & Shri Gaurav Choudhary, ARs ld Sr DR 2025 2025 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld in Appeal No.CIT(A),NFAC/2015- appeared for the represented on behalf of the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.18/RAN/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17 P a g e 2 | 4 3. At the outset, ld AR of the assessee submitted that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee as barred by limitation. It was the submission that before the ld CIT(A), the appeal filed by the assessee was delayed by 387 days and the assessee has filed condonation petition, wherein, it was mentioned that the assessee was undergoing medical treatment due to hypertension and high blood pressure and his parents are senior citizens and they are suffering from various diseases and thus failed to file the appeal within the stipulated time period. He submitted that by not filing the appeal, the assessee would not get benefit rather he will be suffered financial difficulties. He submitted that non-filing of appeal before the ld CIT(A) was not intentional but due to reasonable cause. He also submitted that the Assessing Officer has also passed assessment order u/s.147 r.w.s 144B of the Act due to non-compliance to the notices. He prayed that the delay in filing the appeal before the ld CIT(A) be condoned and the issue be restored to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. 4. In reply, ld Sr DR vehemently supported the order of the ld CIT(A). He argued that the appeal filed by the assessee was not maintainable before the learned CIT(A) due to abnormal delay of 387 days. The assessee failed to furnish sufficient cause for the substantial delay and, therefore, the learned CIT(A) was justified in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal and dismissed the same in limine Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.18/RAN/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17 P a g e 3 | 4 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) shows that the delay of 387 days in filing of appeal was not condoned, as according to him, no sufficient cause was shown under section 249(3) of the Act for the failure to file the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation as contained under section 249(2) of the Act r/w section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and hence, as delay in filing of appeal was not condoned, as a result of which the appeal was not admitted and was rejected accordingly. In our considered opinion, such delay needs to be condoned, because the assessee has been claiming that due to his illness and also due to his parent’s illness during the said period, he could not check the notices sent by the department and could not file the appeal within time. In view of forgoing, we observe that there was no malafide intention of the assessee for delaying the appeal before the ld CIT(A) and he is vigilant in his tax matters. We also observe that due to above reasons also, the assessment passed u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Act was not represented by the assessee. Therefore, we direct the ld CIT(A) to condone the delay of 387 days in filing the appeal before him and readjujdicate the issue afresh after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to file all the evidences before the ld CIT(A) without fail and cooperate in the set aside proceedings. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.18/RAN/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17 P a g e 4 | 4 3. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 19/08/2025. Sd/- sd/- (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ranchi ; Dated 19/08/2025 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Ranchi 1. The Appellant : 2. The Respondent: 3. The CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, 5. DR, ITAT, Ranchi 6. Guard file. //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "