Condoning a delay of 2566 days, the Pune bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) noted that sending the income assessment notice to erstwhile tax consultant’s email without proper communication to the taxpayer is a sufficient cause for delay condonation.
The assessee, Krishna Hanumant Medankar, filed two appeals against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, arising from the assessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144 and penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 respectively.
The CIT(A) dismissed both appeals as time-barred without condoning the delay or adjudicating the issues on merits. The assessee contended that the delay occurred due to non-receipt of notices and lack of knowledge of the proceedings, thereby denying a reasonable opportunity of being heard and violating principles of natural justice.
The bench noted that there was an inordinate delay of 1189 days and 1377 days in filing of the appeals before CIT(A) against the quantum addition and penalty. On going through the reasons for delay provided by the assessee before it appeared that the notices by the Assessing Officer (AO) were sent on the e-mail of the erstwhile tax consultant who failed to communicate the assessee.
The Tribunal relied on the landmark decision of the Apex Court in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji & Ors, wherein it was held that the “sufficient cause” under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, should be construed liberally to advance substantial justice and enable adjudication of matters on merits rather than defeat them on technical grounds of limitation.
The two-member of Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member and Vinay Bhamore, Judicial Member held that, since the issue had not been adjudicated on merits by the CIT(A) and the assessee had not made any submissions on merits, another opportunity should be afforded to the assessee.
It was further pointed out that the assessment order was passed ex parte and that the notices issued by the Assessing Officer fell during the COVID-19 pandemic, which constituted sufficient reason for the assessee’s non-appearance. Hence the Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the Jurisdictional AssessingOfficer for fresh adjudication on merits in accordance with law.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
Krishna Hanumant Medankar vs Income Tax Officer,Ward-8(3), Pune
CITATION : 2026 TAXSCAN (ITAT) 1361Case Number : ITA No. 1994 & 1995/PUN/2026Date of Judgement : 18 Augest 2026Coram : MANISH BORADCounsel of Appellant : Shri Ronak H JainCounsel Of Respondent : Shri Rajesh Haladkar
ADD TO BOOKMARKS
