NIRANJANBHAI ISHVARBHAI PATEL,BANASKANTHA V. THE ITO, WARD-1, HIMATNAGAR

ITA 98/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Niranjanbhai Ishvarbhai Patel against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which had dismissed his appeal as non-maintainable due to a delay in filing. The delay was attributed to the assessee's health issues and lack of awareness of electronic notices, leading to a 160-day delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal found that the delay, being relatively small, coupled with the potential for grave injustice to the assessee, warranted a reconsideration of the appeal on its merits by the CIT(A).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 297940 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NITIN KULKARNI
• Assessee Lawyers: TEJ SHAH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Income from undisclosed sources
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member Niranjanbhai Ishvarbhai Patel, 0, Ekalara, Idar, Banaskantha, Sabarkantha-383430 PAN: ACCPP5978Q (Appellant) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Himatnagar (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Tej Shah, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 15-04-2025 Date of pronouncement : 17-04-2025 आदेश/ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)’] dated 14.11.2024 arising out of the assessment order passed u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The grounds raised are as under:- “1. That the ld. CIT(A) erred in law and in the facts of the case in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal before it and thereby rendering the appeal inadmissible.” ITA No. 98/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year 2014-15 I.T.A No. 98/Ahd/2025 Niranjanbhai Ishvarbhai Patel, A.Y. 2014-15 2 3. At the outset itself, the ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal as non-maintainable, not condoning the delay in filing the appeal before him. The solitary plea before me was that the matter be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) and the assessee be given another opportunity of hearing. He pointed out that in Form No.35 filed to the CIT(A), the assessee had mentioned the reasons for the delay as the assessee was suffering from various diseases and being advised rest by his doctor from 12th March 2022 to 26th August, 2022 which resulted into delay of 160 days in filing the appeal. He fairly admitted that even before the Assessing Officer the assessee did not participate in the assessment proceedings. The ld. counsel for the assessee contended that primarily the assessee is living in rural area and notices issued therefore un-responded being not aware of the e- notices being issued to the assessee. He contended that because of the non-representation of the assessee before the Assessing Officer and also before the CIT(A), the entire agricultural income of the assessee of Rs. 21,67,990/- had been added to his income ,as income from undisclosed sources, in the absence of any explanation and evidence of the source of earning the said income from agricultural activities. He contended, that as it is, the assessee was a man of meagre means having returned income of Rs. 13,19,210/- and the addition of Rs. 21,67,990/- made by the Assessing Officer if not allowed to be explained would result in the income being assessed multiple times to that actually earned by the assessee. 4. The ld. Departmental Representative contended that the assessee having failed to appear both before the Assessing Officer as well as before the CIT(A) and having even not I.T.A No. 98/Ahd/2025 Niranjanbhai Ishvarbhai Patel, A.Y. 2014-15 3 supported his explanation for the delay, the CIT(A) had rightly dismissed the appeal as non-maintainable by not condoning the delay. He vehemently opposed the assessee being given second chance before the Ld.CIT(A). 4.1 To this the Ld. Counsel for the assessee responded by placing an affidavit of the assessee explaining the reasons for delay in filing appeal to the Ld.CIT(A) on oath. 5. Having heard the contentions of both the parties , I am of the view that the present appeal needs to be heard afresh by the Ld.CIT(A), first on the aspect of its maintainability since the assessee has now filed an explanation of the same by way of an affidavit of the assessee bringing the reasons for delay on oath. Moreover, the Ld.CIT(A) ought to have considered the smallness of the delay , of only 50 odd days ,coupled with the fact of grave injustice being caused to the assessee if his appeal is not admitted as also the fact that the assessee in any case is not benefited by not filing an appeal, while considering the assesses application for condonation of delay. 5.1 That after condoning the delay if considered fit,the Ld.CIT(A) ought to hear the appeal on merits after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5.2 In the interest of justice, therefore I restore the matter back to the ld. CIT(A) to re-consider the application filed by the assessee seeking condonation of delay and thereafter adjudicate the appeal on merits. I.T.A No. 98/Ahd/2025 Niranjanbhai Ishvarbhai Patel, A.Y. 2014-15 4 6. In effect, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 17-04-2025 Sd/- (Annapurna Gupta) Accountant Member Ahmedabad : Dated 17/04/2025 आदेश क\u0006 \u0007\bत ल प अ\u000fे षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील\u0012य अ\u0013धकरण, अहमदाबाद "