AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal arises from order dated 11.09.2024, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), by Ld. NFAC.
This case is delayed by 436 days and for this purpose the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay as under: -
“APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 253(5) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1 That Appellant herein has preferred an appeal against the order of the Ld. Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) dated 11.09.2024, for the Assessment Year 2012-2013 (hereinafter referred to as "the Impugned Order").
2 That it is submitted that the son of the Appellant herein, Late Sh. Paneet Kharbanda passed away untimely on 22.03.2019. In view of the same, the Appellant and his wife (LR in the present case) suffered immense mental trauma, which led to both of them developing serious medical conditions. Copy of the death certificate of Late Sh. Puneet Kharbanda is annexed herewith as Annexure 1.
3.That it is submitted that Late Sh. Gautam Kharbanda was suffering inter alia from renal cell carcinoma with lung metastasis, type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease, and accordingly had to be admitted to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital in December, 2023. He unfortunately expired on 16.02.2024. Copy of the medical record of Late Sh, Gautam Kharbanda and his death certificate is annexed herewith as Annexure 2 (colly).
4.That further, the LR of the Appellant, Ms. Usha Kharbanda herself has been suffering from uncontrolled type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease, and her medical condition has deteriorated since the untimely demise of her son and her husband. Copy of the medical record of Ms. Usha Kharbanda is annexed herewith as Annexure 3 (colly).
5 That it is therefore submitted that the LR of the Appellant, Ms. Usha Kharbanda has been under severe stress both mentally and physically due to her son's and her husband's untimely death, and has herself been suffering from severe diseases and medical conditions and was as such not in a sound state of mind to pursue the present appeal. She came to know about the said order and could only talk to her CA in December, 2025 when she got her house in order.
6.That in view of the foregoing facts the Appellant could not file the said appeal before this Hon'ble Tribunal within the time prescribed of 60 days but could only file it after a delay of 436 days, and therefore, the Appellant herein is moving the present application under Section 253(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
7.That the delay in filing the Appeal is neither deliberate nor intentional and has been caused owing to factors beyond the control of the Appellant, as aforementioned. It is therefore respectfully submitted that the Appellant had sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed period of 60 days.
8.That the present application is being made bona fide and in the interest of justice and severe prejudice to her rights shall be caused, if the present appeal is not allowed to be heard on merits.”
There is also a death certificate of the assessee attached with this petition for condonation of delay, whereby it is mentioned that the assessee passed away on 16.02.2024. Considering these facts and the application for condonation of delay, we admit the appeal for adjudication after condoning the delay in filing of the same.
On the last date of hearing, the Ld. AR mentioned that the assessee could not present himself before the Ld. AO and thereafter, suffered an ex parte order. It was further mentioned that even before the Ld. AO, as mentioned on page 4 of the impugned order, the assessee could not make any presentation of facts due to his illness and other problems. It was prayed that the assessee's legal heir may be granted an opportunity for presenting the facts before the authorities below.
The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.
We have carefully considered the rival submissions and have gone through the record before us. We find that there has been no finding of fact at the lower levels in this case and we also find that even though Smt. Usha Kharbanda has presented herself as the legal heir but in the absence of relevant documentation in this regard, we are unable to accept, with any degree of certainty, this claim. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, and in the interest of appropriate fact finding, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) would bring the correct legal heir on record and thereafter proceed with the adjudication on merit.
In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.