Valjibhai Arjanbhai Vegad Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
ITAT Ahmedabad held that delay of 244 days in filing of an appeal caused due to genuine hardship faced by the assessee is condonable. Accordingly, delay condoned due to bona fide reason being demonstrated.
Facts- The assessee is a 71-year-old milk distributor with limited educational background and a lack of familiarity with legal and tax matters. During the demonetization period, cash deposits totalling to Rs.12,55,100/- were made in the assessee’s bank account, along with other deposits throughout the financial year, aggregating to Rs.66,23,500/-.
AO issued several notices u/s. 142(1) and 144 of the Act, requiring the assessee to file a return of income and explain the sources of these deposits. The assessee’s consultant, despite receiving physical copies of the notices forwarded by the assessee, failed to respond or appear before the AO. Consequently, the AO completed the assessment ex-parte u/s. 144 of the Act on 16.11.2019, treating the deposits as unexplained income u/s. 69A of the Act and invoking the provisions of Section 115BBE of the Act to tax the income at the rate of 60%.
CIT(A) passed ex-parte order. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- Held that the delay in filing the appeal was caused by genuine hardships faced by the assessee. The assessee, being of advanced age and lacking formal education and technological knowledge, was heavily reliant on his consultant, who failed to act responsibly. Additionally, the language barrier and lack of access to electronic notices further compounded the assessee’s difficulties in complying with the proceedings. Thus, the delay in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor due to negligence on the part of the assessee. The assessee has demonstrated a bona fide reason for the delay, and in the interest of substantial justice, we hereby condone the delay of 244 days.
