The Surat Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal(ITAT)condoned the delay in filing an appeal by the assessee and restored the matter for fresh assessment to the Assessing Officer (AO).The 159-day delay was not intentional or deliberate, as the assessee had opted out of receiving notices via email, which led to his unawareness of the proceedings.
Akshaykumar Lathiya,the appellant-assessee,filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC) dated August 31, 2023, concerning the Assessment Year (AY)2017-18. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)[CIT(A)] upheld the Assessing Officer(AO)’s addition of ₹36.00 lakhs under Section 69A, which was attributed to cash deposits made during the demonetization period and taxed under Section 115BBE at 77.25%.
Comprehensive Guide of Law and Procedure for Filing of Income Tax Appeals, Click Here
The assessee sought condonation for a delay of 159 days in filing. He explained that he was unaware of the impugned order until March 2024, when he checked the Income Tax Department(ITD) Portal. This delay was attributed to the lack of physical notices or copies of the orders and his limited familiarity with email communication. He had initially provided an email address but opted out of receiving notices via email, which contributed to his lack of awareness regarding the proceedings.
The assessee also contended that the assessment order under Section 144 was made without granting a fair and reasonable opportunity for a hearing. He asserted that the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)[CIT(A)] also issued an ex-parte order without discussing the merits of his case.
The assessee’s representative emphasized that the assessee would be more vigilant in future compliance with notices from lower authorities and had a strong case on merit that deserved another opportunity for proper adjudication.
Comprehensive Guide of Law and Procedure for Filing of Income Tax Appeals, Click Here
In contrast, the Senior Departmental Representative(Sr.DR) argued that the assessee had not provided sufficient grounds for the delay and had failed to respond adequately to the opportunities presented by the lower authorities.
The appellate tribunal found that the lower authorities had issued orders in ex parte proceedings and reopened the case of the assessee based on information about cash and credit entries in the bank account. It noted that the assessee failed to respond to both the AO and the CIT(A).
Comprehensive Guide of Law and Procedure for Filing of Income Tax Appeals, Click Here
A single member bench Pawan Singh(Judicial Member) acknowledged the assessee’s claim of not receiving notices via email but determined that substantial rights were involved. It restored the case to the AO for a fresh assessment, directing that a fair opportunity for hearing be granted.
The tribunal instructed the assessee to be more vigilant in future compliance and to provide all necessary details and evidence promptly.
Ultimately, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes .
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
