Case Law Details
Alli Muniswamy Narayan Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
The assessee, an individual, filed his return of income for Assessment Year 2023-24 on 26.12.2023. The return was processed under Section 143(1) and a refund was granted. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and several notices were issued, to which the assessee responded by filing submissions and documents.
A show cause notice was later issued on 24.01.2025. According to the assessee, he could not respond to this notice due to ill health. Consequently, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3). In the assessment order, the lease rent received from a poultry farm was not accepted as returned and was treated as income from house property. The Assessing Officer also treated credits appearing in the assessee’s bank accounts as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 and made a separate addition under Section 69A in respect of cash deposits in the bank account. Since no response was filed to the show cause notice, these additions were confirmed.
The assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) with a delay of 43 days. The Commissioner (Appeals) was not satisfied with the reasons furnished for condonation of delay and dismissed the appeal as time-barred.
Before the Tribunal, the assessee submitted that the delay occurred due to health issues that prevented him from moving independently and filing the appeal within the prescribed period. Medical prescriptions and diagnostic reports were produced in support of the claim. The assessee also sought restoration of the matter for adjudication on merits.
The Tribunal observed that the assessee had explained the reasons for the delay in detail and had furnished medical records evidencing illness. It noted that the Commissioner (Appeals) had not questioned the genuineness of those records. The Tribunal further observed that the delay was only 43 days and was supported by health-related reasons.
The Tribunal also noted that the assessee had cooperated during the assessment proceedings by responding to earlier notices and filing documents, but was unable to reply to the final show cause notice because of ill health.
Considering the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal held that the delay of 43 days deserved to be condoned. It set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and restored the matter to his file for fresh adjudication on merits. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
This is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 08/09/2025 in respect of the A.Y. 2023-24.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 26/12/2023. The said return was processed u/s. 143(1) and a refund was also given by the department. Thereafter the assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny and several notices were issued. The assessee also filed his submissions. Finally a show cause notice was issued on 24/01/2025. The assessee was not able to respond to the said show cause notice because of his health conditions and therefore the AO had made the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act. In the said assessment, the AO had not accepted the lease amount received against the poultry farm and treated the said as income from house property. Similarly, the AO had treated the credits in his bank accounts as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. Another addition u/s. 69A was made on the cash deposits made into the bank account. Even though the assessee had responded to the earlier notices, since the assessee had not responded to the show cause notice, the AO had confirmed the said additions.
3. As against the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) with a delay of 43 days. The Ld.CIT(A) had calculated the aid delay and not satisfied with the reasons stated in the application to condone the said delay and dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation.
4. As against the said order, the present appeal has been filed by the assessee.
5. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessment order is dated 26/02/2025 and the assessee had filed the appeal on 10/04/2025 and also explained the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal. The Ld.AR further submitted that because of ill health of assessee, the appeal could not be presented in time. In support of the said contention, the Ld.AR also filed some medical documents to show that the assessee is having health issues and prayed that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) may be set aside and the issue may be remitted to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for deciding the issue on merits.
6. The Ld.DR submitted that the reasons adduced by the assessee is not a valid one and therefore the Ld.CIT(A) had correctly not accepted the said reasons and dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation.
7. We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record.
8. The only dispute involved in this appeal is against the rejection order of the Ld.CIT(A) on the ground that the assessee had not furnished any valid reasons for condoning the said delay of 43 days in filing the appeal before him. We have also considered the reasons stated in the application and the assessee had elaborately stated the reasons for not presenting the appeal in time. The main reason stated by the assessee is that because of his health condition, he was not able to move independently and therefore the appeal could not be filed in time. Only after the improvement of health, the assessee took steps to file the appeal. We have also considered the medical prescriptions furnished by the assessee and also the diagnostic reports which evidenced that the assessee was suffering from illness. It is not the case of the Ld.CIT(A) that the records are not genuine. In such circumstances, the order of the Ld.CIT(A) in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal seems to be not a correct one. Further, the delay is only 43 days and the reasons stated are also on health grounds.
9. The AO had also confirmed the additions only on the ground that the assessee had not filed their objections to the show cause notice. Even though the assessee had cooperated with the department and filed replies and documents to the various notices issued, the assessee was not able to respond to the show cause notice in view of his ill health.
10. Considering the entire facts, we are inclined to set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) by condoning the delay of 43 days in filing the appeal before him and remit this issue to his file for deciding the issue afresh.
11. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 18th May, 2026.
Author Bio
