Monika Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur)
The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT Jaipur challenging the order dated 25 October 2024 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)) for AY 2016–17. The dispute originated from the ex-parte assessment order dated 14 December 2018 passed under Section 144 by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), Jaipur. The assessee raised several grounds, primarily contesting the CIT(A)’s decision to set aside the assessment to the Assessing Officer (AO) despite a remand report already being obtained. She argued that the CIT(A) incorrectly treated the power to set aside under amended Section 251 as mandatory, failed to consider the remand report, and overlooked that the expression “may set aside” confers discretion rather than obligation.
At the outset, there was a delay of 231 days in filing the appeal. The assessee sought condonation explaining that the original assessment was ex-parte due to a change of address, and that she believed the amendment to Section 251 made it obligatory for the CIT(A) to set aside every Section 144 assessment. She waited for reassessment proceedings instead of approaching the Tribunal. The delay was admitted as bona fide, and the Department raised no objection. The ITAT condoned the delay in view of sufficient cause.
