RUBY SAGIR AHMED SHAIKH,MUMBAI V. ITO -41 (1)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 5619/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves penalty appeals filed by Ruby Sagir Ahmed Shaikh against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18. The appeals were initially dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a delay in filing, which ranged from 30 to 44 days. The assessee's representative argued that the delay was due to the non-checking of the Income Tax portal by the assessee's consultant, who managed the email and mobile communications. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered the merits of the case and the reasons for the delay in filing the appeals. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to remit the appeals back to the CIT(A) for a fresh consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 792575 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 10-09-2025
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANNAVARAN KOSURI
• Assessee Lawyers: KINJAL BHUTA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 5617/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 I.T.A. No. 5618/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 I.T.A. No. 5619/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ruby Sagir Ahmed Shaikh Flat No. 915/916 Lok Sarita, D-Wing Military Road, Marol Andheri (East) Mumbai - 400049 [PAN: CFZPS1107N] Vs. ITO, Ward –41(1)(3) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Kinjal Bhuta, Advocate Revenue by Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 17.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 02.12.2025 ORDER Per Smt. Beena Billai, JM: Present penalty appeals filed by the assessee arise out of order dated 18/07/2025 passed by NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter “the Ld. CIT(A)”] for assessment year 2017-18. 2. At the outset, Ld. AR submitted that, there is delay in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) ranging between 30 to 44 days, in all the three appeals. He submitted that, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals in limine without considering the circumstances under Printed from counselvise.com 2 I.T.A. No. 5617/Mum/2025 I.T.A. No. 5618/Mum/202 I.T.A. No. 5619/Mum/2025 which the delay occurred. The Ld.AR placed before us the affidavit that was filed along with the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) stating that assessee was not aware of any scrutiny notice which was displayed on the Income Tax portal as the e-mail id and mobile number was of assessee’s consultant who did not check the portal at regular intervals. It was only when assessee received the recovery notice that the penalty orders having passed by Ld. CIT(A) came to her notice. He submitted that, assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the Ld. CIT(A). Under such circumstances, the Ld. AR prayed that the appeal may be remitted to the Ld. CIT(A) to consider the application of the assessee, in accordance with law having regard to the principles of natural justice. 2.1. The Ld. DR though objected to the submission of the Ld. AR, could not controvert the arguments advanced to justify the delay in filing of appeals before Ld. CIT(A). 3. We have considered the submissions advanced by both the sides in light of the records placed before us. 4. Admittedly, there is delay in filing of all three appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). From the paperbook filed by the assessee, we note that affidavit seeking condonation of delay was furnished along with Form 35 which was ignored and not considered. The Ld. CIT(A) passed order without considering anything on merits of the case. In the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remit all three appeals to the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the assesse to file the Printed from counselvise.com 3 I.T.A. No. 5617/Mum/2025 I.T.A. No. 5618/Mum/202 I.T.A. No. 5619/Mum/2025 condonation petition once again before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. The Ld. CIT(A) shall consider the delay, in accordance with law. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass a detailed order on merits in accordance with law by giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee in all the appeals stand partly allowed for statistical purposes. In the result, appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 02/12/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (RENU JAUHRI) (BEENA PILLAI) Accountant Member Judicial Member Mumbai Dated: 02/12/2025 SC Sr. P.S. Printed from counselvise.com 4 I.T.A. No. 5617/Mum/2025 I.T.A. No. 5618/Mum/202 I.T.A. No. 5619/Mum/2025 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "