Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

PER R.K. PANDA, VP:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.09.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2018-19.

2. The only issue raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal relates to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in not condoning the delay of 191 days on account of insufficient cause and thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee.

3. There is a delay of 50 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed a condonation application along with an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. It has been mentioned in the condonation application that the assessee is a house wife and has no regular source of income for which she did not file her return of income u/s 139(1) of the of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The assessee's father had got allotment of flat from MHADA in the year 2009 and he passed away in the year 2015. The assessee's mother Smt. Kamal Sadashivrao Pol, who became the owner of this flat, sold it on 05.12.2017 for a consideration of Rs.1,52,00,000/-. Her two daughters and two sons were the confirming parties to the sale transactions and none of the confirming parties have received any amount out of the sale consideration. The case of the assessee was reopened u/s 148 of the Act in response to which the assessee filed her ITR declaring total income of Rs.48,200/-. She also submitted the particulars of transaction of sale, evidence of acquisition of the flat and copy of bank statement of her mother to show that she had not received any amount of sale consideration. However, the Assessing Officer treated the entire sale consideration of Rs.1,52,00,000/- as income of the assessee from long term capital gain. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC on 16.10.2024. The assessee received notice of hearing from the office of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. The assessee uploaded detailed written arguments narrating all the facts of the case. However, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC did not consider the facts of the case and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on account of delay. Since the assessee did not receive the copy of the appellate order and came to know of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC only when she received SMS from the Income Tax Department. Thereafter, the consultant appointed by the assessee found that the appeal of the assessee filed against the penalty order passed u/s 272A(1)(d) of the Act was passed and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC had deleted the penalty of Rs.30,000/-. However, appeal filed gainst the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC has been dismissed. Thereafter, the assessee took steps in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal by which time there was a delay of 54 days. Relying on various decisions he submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC should not have dismissed the appeal on account of delay and should have decided the appeal on merit by condoning the delay. He accordingly submitted that he has no objection if the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to condone the delay in filing of the appeal and decide the issue on merit.