Shahmed Ahmed Vs AUIT/CIT(A) (ITAT Amritsar)
Non-Service of Assessment Order Constitutes Sufficient Cause: Amritsar ITAT Condones 137-Day Delay
The assessee’s assessment was completed ex parte at ₹1.06 crore, corresponding to cash deposited in his bank account. His appeal was subsequently dismissed by the CIT(A) at the admission stage due to a delay of 137 days, without examining the case on merits.
The assessee explained that he resided in the Doda area of Jammu and Kashmir, had not received the assessment order by email, and became aware of it only upon receiving the penalty notice. He also contended that the CIT(A) had not provided an adequate opportunity to explain the delay.
The Amritsar ITAT held that the interests of justice required the delay to be condoned, particularly since the appeal had never been adjudicated on merits. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh disposal after providing the assessee a proper opportunity of hearing. The assessee was directed to produce documentary evidence explaining the source of the ₹1.06 crore cash deposits and cooperate fully in the appellate proceedings.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AMRITSAR
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, passed u/s 250 of the IT Act, 1961, dated 18.06.2025, which has emanated from the order of the AO, passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 19.03.2024.
2. Brief facts emerging from records are that the assessee has deposited cash amounting to Rs.1.06 crore in his bank A/c in J & K Bank during the F.Y. 2015-16 relevant to the assessment year under appeal.
2.1 In absence of any return, proceedings were initiated vide notice u/s 148 dated 06.03.2022 (as per procedure). 2.2 In absence of any response to various notices subsequently issued, assessment was completed on a total income of Rs.1.06 crore.
3. The matter carried in appeal before the ld. first appellate authority has dismissed in limine u/s 249(3) refusing to condone the delay of 137 days (one hundred thirty-seven days) in filing the appeal the ld. CIT(A) not being satisfied with the reasons stated for condonation.
4. Now the assessee is before the tribunal where he has taken seven grounds of appeal in Form 36 but the main grievance of the assessee is absence of opportunity of hearing being provided by the ld. first appellate authority and rejection of the appeal refusing to condone the delay of 137 days.
4.1 In course of hearing the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee is a resident of “Kashmir Valley” of Doda area and the order of the AO has not been received by the assessee in his e-mail id and he had no information regarding the disposal of the assessment order and he became aware of the same after receiving of the penalty notice.
4.2 He further submitted that the ld. first appellate authority has not allowed an opportunity to the assessee to explain the delay before rejection of the appeal which has violated the principles of natural justice. He prayed for opportunity of proper hearing to put forth his case and to explain the source of deposit in his bank account.
5. The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee is habitual defaulter and there has not been any compliance even before the AO in spite of seven different notices being issued (as apparent from the page 2 of the assessment order).
6. We have heard the rival submissions and considered the materials on record and we find that appeal has not been adjudicated on the merits of the case and the same has not been admitted for hearing and dismissed u/s 249(3) of the Act on the grounds of delay.
6.1 We are of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the delay of 137 days arising out of alleged none service of assessment order within the due time is condone and such, we condone the delay of 137 days and remand the matter back to the files of the ld. first appellate authority for adjudicating on the grounds contained in Form 35 on merits. The assessee will be allowed proper opportunity of being heard and notice to be issued in the e-mail id as stated in Form 35 and the assessee is also directed to file all documentary evidences alongwith the submissions to explain the source of cash deposited in his bank and to fully cooperate in the appellate proceedings. (Necessary report may be obtained from the AO as per procedure).
7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 10.08.2026 under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963.
