Seema Anand vs ITO, Ward 72 (1)

PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [for short ‘ld. CIT (A)] dated 26.02.2026 for the Assessment Year 2022-23.

At the outset, it was submitted by the ld. AR for the assessee that Assessing Officer has passed the assessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) without giving proper opportunity to the assessee. He submitted that ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal being time barred. He further submitted that there was a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal in time before the ld. CIT (A). He pleaded that the delay before the ld. CIT (A) may be condoned and the matter may be restored to the file of AO.

On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the order of the authorities below.

Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Upon careful consideration, we noticed that the reasons for delay of 445 days are as under :-

At the relevant time, my income tax matters were being handled by CA, Shailendra Prasad, Partner at RGSP & Company, who unfortunately did not communicate the about the orders passed. However, despite repeated follow-ups, the consultant failed to respond, leaving me unaware of the orders and thereby unable to initiate the appeal process within the prescribed time.

There was also an issue with the email ID used for department communication, which belonged to the former consultant and remained in accessible to me during the relevant period, resulting in missed updates and official correspondence. The email ID registered with the Income Tax Department was [email protected].

I changed my consultant and promptly instructed by the new consultant about the lapse of filing an appeal against the order.

After considering the above reasons, we find that the counsel for the assessee had not communicated to the assessee. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT (A). We are also of the considered view that in the interest of justice, the matter requires denovo assessment. Therefore, we remit back the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Assessee is directed through his counsel to fully cooperate with the AO during the proceedings. We hold and direct accordingly.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.