UMARAVATI,GHAZIPUR V. ITO AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

ITA 393/RPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Umarawati, the appellant, who faced an income tax assessment for the year 2018-19. The appellant's appeal to the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC was initially dismissed due to a delay of 122 days in filing the appeal. The appellant provided several reasons for the delay, including lack of access to the assessment order and demand notice, and health issues. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not adequately considered these reasons or conducted any inquiry into the genuineness of the appellant's claims. Citing precedents that emphasize a liberal approach towards condoning delays in filing appeals, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case for a fresh examination on its merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 708442 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Other Referred Cases: CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF), Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Jagdish Prasad Singhania Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Raipur (C.G.)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA PATEL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Principle of natural justice; TDS

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण Ûयायपीठ “एक-सदèय” मामला रायपुर मɅ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR Įी पाथ[ सारथी चौधरȣ, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.393/RPR/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ /Assessment Year: 2018-19 Umrawati, W/o Lt. Harishankar, Village and Post Goshalpur, Distt. Ghazipur, Village and Post Goshalpur, 233228, Uttar Pradesh PAN: AGDPU2867Q .......अपीलाथȸ / Appellant बनाम / V/s. ITO, Ambikapur, Income Tax office, 187, Kharsia Rd. Bhagwan Pur, Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh 497001 ……Ĥ×यथȸ / Respondent Assessee by : None. Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing : 08.07.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख / Date of Pronouncement : 14.07.2025 2 Umarawati Vs. ITO, Ambikapur ITA No.393/RPR/2025 आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM The captioned appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 18.06.2024 for the assessment year 2018-19 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. At the time of hearing none appeared for the assessee. The statement of Ld. Sr. DR recorded and the matter taken as heard on merits. 3. It is observed from the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC that the assessee had filed the appeal before the said authority which was delayed by 122 days. The assessee had filed condonation petition before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC explaining the reasons for the said delay of 122 days. The said reasons as explained by the assessee is culled out as follows: “The appellant mentioned reason for delay in filing appeal in Form no 35 on 25/08/2024 as under: \"1.Sagar jamdade is a very simple person, who earns his living by the means of agriculture, he lives in a small village shabag wal. The basic earning is from the income from agriculture. 2. The education acquired by him is just metric. The person is not at all educated to understand the laws of income tax. 3. The person is not at all aware of the laws of the income tax or other authority, due to his innocence and simplicity. 4. The assessee was not well and was suffering from hepatitis because of which he was unable to coordinate, communicate and respond to the matter at concern. 3 Umarawati Vs. ITO, Ambikapur ITA No.393/RPR/2025 5. The details and order sent on the mail were not accessible to him, due to none checking and non availability of email access. The email id was on the portal was of earlier consultant and he has not submitted and informed me about the notices and other demand 6. Due to non availability, the assessee was not aware about the disposal of assessment, Pune. It was also not aware about the ex- party assessment effect given by AG and as well as penalty order passed, there being no one to represent. 7. Delay in filing appeal is due to non receiving of orders ofine and correct email id was not updated at portal.\" Further, the appellant has filed a written submission on 06/05/2024 as under: To Honorable Commissioner of Income tax (appeal) Income tax Department NEAC Delhi Sir, Sub: Application for condonation of delay for appeal filed beyond time limit Petition Regarding. PAN: AGDPU2867Q Honourable Sir, I have not received the copy of assessment order and notice of demand. I have come to the knowledge of assessment proceeding when I have received notice for penalty 30/07/2023 on my address. Before that no notices or orders regarding proceeding has been received at my address. Sir, I have also inform Income tax officer, Ambikapur about my non receipt of notices in written, receiving of same is attached herewith. Sir, As soon as I have received knowledge of proceeding I have preferred an appeal against order of assessing officer, as I have no knowledge of proceedings and it is against principal of natural justice to impose such a heavy demand against me without opportunity for being heard. Sir, I request you to kindly grant me relief as my appeal is delayed but I have filed appeal within 30 days as I come the 4 Umarawati Vs. ITO, Ambikapur ITA No.393/RPR/2025 knowledge of appeal, I have presented my appeal on 27/08/2023 for your kind persuasion. However, in the light of judicial decisions and also for sake of natural justice, while exercising your discretion U/s 250 of the Income Tax Act and before passing a speaking order in this regard, we requested your goodself to be kind enough to provide an opportunity of hearing for placing our arguments. उमरावती Umarawati Assessee Encl. As Above Further, the appellant has filed a written submission on 2305/2024 as under: Honourable Sir, I have not received the copy of assessment order and notice of demand. I have come to the knowledge of assessment proceeding when I have received notice for penalty 30/07/2023 on my address. Before that no notices or orders regarding proceeding has been received at my address. Sir, I have also inform Income tax officer, Ambikapur about my non receipt of notices in written, receiving of same is attached herewith. Sir, As soon as I have received knowledge of proceeding I have preferred an appeal against order of assessing officer, as I have no knowledge of proceedings and it is against principal of natural justice to impose such a heavy demand against me without opportunity for being heard. Sir, I request you to kindly grant me relief as my appeal is delayed but I have filed appeal within 30 days as I come the knowledge of appeal. I have presented my appeal on 27/08/2023 for your kind persuasion. However, in the light of judicial decisions and also for sake of natural justice, while exercising your discretion U/s 250 of the Income Tax Act and before passing a speaking order in this regard, we requested your goodself to be kind enough to provide an opportunity of hearing for placing our arguments.” 4. After considering the condonation petition of the assessee the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground of limitation itself without adjudicating on the merits of the matter. 5 Umarawati Vs. ITO, Ambikapur ITA No.393/RPR/2025 5. That on a careful consideration and on perusal of the reasons which were furnished by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, it is evident that the assessee in order to file appeal in Form No.35, the demand notice u/s 156 of the Act and the assessment order was still not in his possession as the same was not provided from the office of the AO. In the condonation petition dated 06.05.2024 it has been mentioned that he has not received a copy of the assessment order and copy of demand notice. By the time assessee procured the same there was a delay of 122 days in filing of the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. As per the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom), the Hon’ble High Court has held that every appellate authority shall have to deal with the merits of the matter and not dismiss the appeal in limine in summary manner. That, further, it is observed also the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has not brought out any cogent reason for not accepting the condonation petition filed by the assessee nor has conducted any enquiry regarding the genuineness of the claim made by the assessee and instead in summary manner had dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay of the assessee. That Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Civil Appeal Nos……………../2025 [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 26310-26311/2024, dated 31.01.2025, Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 6 Umarawati Vs. ITO, Ambikapur ITA No.393/RPR/2025 2024, dated 21st March, 2025 and Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh in the case of Jagdish Prasad Singhania Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025, have held that so far as the delay is concerned a much more judicious and liberal approach must have to be adopted by the concerned authority. 6. Considering the entire spectrum of facts and the legal position, undoubtedly the appeal before the first appellate authority had to be filed in Form No. 35 which includes the copy of assessment order and demand notice u/s 156 of the Act as well. Without these documents filing of the appeal would have been defective and invalid. The Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has not adopted judicious and liberal approach since the said authority has not brought any reason apparent in its order for not condoning the said delay. That based on the aforesaid examination of the facts and the legal principles, the order of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is set-aside, the delay of 122 days in filing of the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is hereby condoned and the matter remanded back to its file for de novo adjudication as per law while complying with principles of natural justice. As per above terms, the grounds stands allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7 Umarawati Vs. ITO, Ambikapur ITA No.393/RPR/2025 Order pronounced in open court on 14th day of July, 2025. Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) ÛयाǓयक सदèय/JUDICIAL MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; Ǒदनांक / Dated : 14th July, 2025. SB, Sr. PS आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ / The Appellant. 2. Ĥ×यथȸ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(Appeals)-1, Raipur (C.G.) 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, “एक-सदèय” बɅच, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Raipur. 5. गाड[ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur "