ITAT Ahmedabad Condones 153-Day Delay By Senior Citizen Unaware Of Tax Procedure, Orders Fresh Hearing

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) on 23 March, held that delay in filing an appeal by a lady senior citizen constituted a sufficient and reasonable cause, and restored the matter for fresh adjudication.

A Bench comprising Judicial Member Suchitra Kamble and Accountant Member Annapurna Gupta condoned a delay of 153 days, observing that the taxpayer's unfamiliarity with income tax procedures and technology justified the delay. The Bench observed:

“Considering the facts of the case of the assessee being a lady, a senior citizen and non-filer of the return of income, her explanation that she was totally unaware of the technicalities of the income-tax proceedings and also of the technology used cannot be said to be outrightly false or untrue and merited consideration.”

The case arose after the CIT(A), NFAC, dismissed the taxpayer's appeal as non-maintainable on account of delay. The taxpayer contended that she became aware of the ex-parte assessment order only later, upon which she promptly engaged a tax consultant and filed the appeal.

On merits, an addition of Rs. 72.20 lakh was made on account of alleged capital gains from the sale of immovable property, treating the taxpayer as having a 1/5th share. The taxpayer argued that she was merely a confirming party and had not received any sale consideration.

The Tribunal found merit in her explanation, emphasising that considering her age, background, and lack of exposure to tax compliance systems, no negligence could be attributed to her. It further noted that the assessee appeared to have a prima facie case on merits.

“Her reason for the delay in filing the appeal cannot be rejected as not sufficiently explaining the delay in filing the appeal. No laxity can be attributed to the assessee in the circumstances as described above.”

Accordingly, ITAT condoned the delay and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after providing adequate opportunity of hearing.

For Appellant: Hersh Jani, AR

For Respondent: Girish Parihar, Sr.DR