VILAVANKADU NAGARAJAN,CHENNAI V. ITO, NCW-1(1), CHENNAI

ITA 260/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Ms. Vilavankadu Nagarajan Asvinidevi against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, which was passed ex-parte due to the assessee's failure to respond to notices. The notices were sent to her mother's email, which led to a delay in the assessee's response as she was not well-versed with electronic communication and had recently married, moving out of her mother's residence. The Tribunal found sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal and condoned it, subsequently restoring the case to the AO for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 35575 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A. SASIKUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: V. BALAJI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 250; 264

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपील य अ\u000bधकरण, ‘डी ’ \u000eयायपीठ, चे\u000eन IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI \u0014ी जॉज\u0017 जॉज\u0017 क े, , , , उपा\u0019य\u001a एवं \u0014ी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, , , , लेखा सद$य क े सम\u001a BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 260/CHNY/2025 िनधा\u0005रण वष\u0005/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ms.Vilavankadu Nagarajan Asvinidevi, 75,G.N.Chetty Road, T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. PAN: BGMPA-9306-C Vs. Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward-1(1) Chennai. (अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant) (\b\tयथ\u0007/Respondent) अपीलाथ\u0007 क\t ओर से/Appellant by : Mr. V.Balaji, Advocate \u000bयथ\u0007 क\t ओर से/Respondent by : Mr. A.Sasikumar, CIT सुनवाई क\t तारीख/Date of Hearing : 20.03.2025 घोषणा क\t तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 20.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(A)/NFAC, order dated 11.03.2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2013-14. 2. There is a delay of 264 days in filing this appeal. The assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay supported by affidavit stating therein reasons for belated filing of the appeal. The reasons stated in the condonation application for belated filing of the appeal - 2 - ITA No.260//CHNY/2025 is that notices were sent to assessee’s mother’s e-mail ID, who is not well versed with the electronic communication mode and since assessee got married she is not residing with her mother. Hence, there was delay in filing the appeal. 3. On perusal of the aforesaid reasons in the condonation application, we are of the view that there is sufficient cause for belated filing of the appeal and no latches can be attributed to the assessee. Hence, we condone the delay in filing this appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 4. At the very outset, we notice that the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order. The reason for deciding the appeal ex-parte was that the assessee did not reply to the notices issued from the office of the CIT(A). The ld.AR submitted that in the interest of justice and equity, one more opportunity may be provided to assessee to represent its case before the AO. 5. The ld.DR supported the orders of CIT(A) and AO. 6. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Office of the CIT(A) had issued four hearing notices directing the assessee to file certain details/documents. Since there was no response by the assessee to the notices issued, the CIT(A) - 3 - ITA No.260//CHNY/2025 passed ex-parte orders. It is the claim of the assessee that the notices issued through e-mail have been sent to her mother’s e-mail ID and the assessee is not residing with her mother after marriage. In the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that assessee ought to be provided with one more opportunity to represent her case and accordingly, the issues raised in this appeal are restored to the files of the AO. The assessee is directed to co- operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 20th March, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (एस.आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सद$य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (जॉज\u0017 जॉज\u0017 क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपा\u0019य\u001a /VICE PRESIDENT चे\u000eनई/Chennai, 'दनांक/Date: 20.03.2025 DS - 4 - ITA No.260//CHNY/2025 आदेश क) *+त-ल.प अ/े.षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ1/Appellant 2. *2यथ1/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु3त /CIT, Chennai/Salem 4. .वभागीय *+त+न\u000bध/DR 5. गाड\u0017 फाईल/GF. "