Govind vs ITO Ward 1(3)

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1067807221(1), dated 21.08.2024 involving proceedings under section 144/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation petition, we hereby condone delay of 436 days in filing of the instant appeal given this fact that he claims himself to be the legal representative of the deceased assessee wherein possibility of communication gaps could not be altogether ruled out.

It next transpires during the course of hearing that the appellant/alleged legal representative herein Shri Govind is aggrieved against both the learned lower authorities’ respective assessment and lower appellate findings assessing him regarding the cash deposits/investigation allegedly made by his father Shri Bishu Yadav who is stated to have left for his heavenly abode on 11.01.2015 i.e. much before the initiation of the impugned section 148/147 proceedings against him. The Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 11.12.2019 in the appellant’s name added his deceased father’s cash deposits and other income which stand upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

It is in this factual backdrop that the appellant invites our attention to the CIT(A)/NFAC’s lower appellate discussion proceeding ex-parte against the assessee. The Revenue fairly informs us that the appellate’s lower appeal institute on 26.05.2023 against the assessment order dated 11.12.2019 suffered from delay and latches as well which has been rightly not condoned for want of a cogent explanation alongwith supportive evidences. We are of the considered view un these facts and circumstances that once the appellant claims himself to be the legal representative of the deceased assessee, possibility of communication copies in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out. The appellant’s delay in institution of his lower appeal on 26.05.2023 against the assessment order dated 11.12.2019; including Covid-19 pandemic outbreak period, is hereby condoned in the larger interest of justice. We thus remit the instant appeal back to learned CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication on merits with a rider that the appellant shall first of all decide the clinching legal issue as to whether he satisfies the test of being a legal representative u/s 2(29) of the Act r.w.s. 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, or not.

All other remaining legal as well as factual issues are kept open at this stage to be adjudicated in the lower appellate proceedings.

This appellant’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.