Jhansi Kasam Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)
NFAC Error: Delay Condoned Because Appeal Notices Were Sent to Wrong Email; Natural Justice Violation: ITAT Sets Aside Ex Parte Order Due to Incorrect Email Service; Delay Condoned as NFAC Sent Notices to Wrong Email – ITAT Restores Appeal for Fresh Hearing.
ITAT Hyderabad condoned a 211-day delay in filing the appeal & restored her case to CIT(A), after finding that all NFAC notices were sent to incorrect email IDs, leaving her unaware of the appellate order.
Tribunal held that the delay was neither deliberate nor negligent and relied on the SC ruling in Vidya Shankar Jaiswal v. ITO (2025), emphasising a liberal, justice-oriented approach to condonation. It found that the ex parte dismissal violated natural justice, as the assessee never received proper notice.
The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, directing the CIT(A) to decide the matter afresh after giving a fair opportunity of hearing.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT HYDERABAD
This appeal is filed by Jhansi Kasam (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 12/11/2024 for the A.Y. 2017-18.
2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 211 days in filing of the present appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has filed a condonation petition along with a copy of the affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay. The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that the assessee had, while filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), mentioned the e-mail ID as “[email protected]” in column No.17 of Form No.35 for sending of notices to the assessee. However, none of the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) were sent to this e-mail address. Instead, the notices were sent to other e-mail IDs such as “[email protected]” and “[email protected]”. As a result, the assessee was unaware of the notices as well as the appellate order of the Ld. CIT (A). It was further submitted that the assessee’s counsel, while checking the status of the appeal in the second week of August 2025, came to know for the first time about the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). Immediately thereafter, the assessee made necessary arrangements to file the appeal before this Tribunal. The Ld. AR submitted that the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional but caused due to circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. The Ld. AR, therefore, prayed for condonation of the delay and admission of the appeal for adjudication on merits.
