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 21.11.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), by NFAC, Delhi. In this case, the Ld. AO passed an order dated 15.12.2019 in an ex parte manner u/s 144 of the Act. Through this order an addition of Rs.439,98,050/- was made u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment in immovable property.
The aggrieved assessee approached the CIT(A), where also he could not succeed on the ground that a delay of 826 days was not condoned u/s 249(3) of the Act. In this regard, we need to briefly consider the reasons given for the delay in filing of first appeal by the assessee. The assessee is claimed to be a South African national who had moved back to South Africa after his assignment ended in India in July, 2016. It is stated that due to the nature of work of the Appellant he was not vigilant enough in checking the e-filing portal where he could have obtained the assessment order against which the appeal needed to be filed. It is also stated that the assessee was not keeping track of his personal e-mail id after his Indian assignment ended. It is also stated that the notices issued by the Ld. AO ended up in the spam folder of the assessee. Thereafter, the Covid period followed and the consequent extension of limitation by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It was the submission before the Ld. CIT(A) that in case the extended limitation period was considered then the actual delay was considerably less than the 826 days mentioned in the impugned order.
Needless to say, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the reasons given by the assessee were inadequate and thereafter the appeal was dismissed in limine.
Aggrieved with the action of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the present appeal with grounds challenging the non-condonation of delay and also on grounds of merit.
Before us the Ld. AR read out extensively from the reasons for delay presented before the Ld. CIT(A) and stated that there was no ill intention in causing the delay because ultimately it was going to hurt the assessee more than anybody else. It was the submission that because of the international nature of the assignment of the assessee the due dates for filing appeal could not be strictly adhered too. It was the prayer that the delay may be condoned and the matter remanded back to the authorities below for adjudication.
The ld. DR had no objection in case the matter was to be remanded back.
We have considered the rival submissions and have gone through the records before us. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and after condoning the delay before the Ld. CIT(A), we remand this matter back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment.
In the result, appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.