The Rajkot Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has condoned a 607-day delay in filing an appeal after accepting that the assessee’s post-polio disability and serious health issues prevented him from effectively pursuing appellate proceedings.
The bench of Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member) and Dr. Arjun Lal Saini (Accountant Member) restored the matter to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication, enabling the assessee to produce documentary evidence in support of his claim of exempt agricultural income.
The appellant challenged the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17. The appeal before the Tribunal arose from an assessment order passed under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after the assessee failed to adequately respond to statutory notices during assessment proceedings.
Buy Now: INCOME TAX E-COMPILATION – JUNE 2026
The assessee had filed his return declaring a taxable income of ₹6,090 while claiming agricultural income of ₹20.32 lakh as exempt. According to the return, the gross agricultural receipts amounted to ₹67.44 lakh. During scrutiny, the Assessing Officer sought supporting evidence such as land records, details of crops cultivated, sale bills, expenditure vouchers, and other relevant documents to verify the agricultural income claim.
However, the assessee furnished only an online reply without supporting documentary evidence. Consequently, the AO rejected the agricultural income claim and completed the assessment by determining the total income at ₹69.03 lakh. The CIT(A) subsequently dismissed the appeal due to repeated non-appearance by the assessee.
When the matter reached the ITAT, the Department opposed the appeal, pointing out that there was a 607-day delay in filing it. The Revenue argued that the assessee had consistently failed to comply with proceedings before both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A), describing him as a habitual defaulter.
The assessee, however, explained that he was suffering from post-polio disability and other serious physical ailments, which prevented him from effectively pursuing the litigation. It was also submitted that he became aware of the appellate order only after his bank account was attached for recovery of the outstanding tax demand. He requested that the delay be condoned and that one more opportunity be granted to produce evidence substantiating the agricultural income claim.
The Tribunal reiterated that courts ordinarily adopt a liberal approach in condoning delays where sufficient cause is shown, so that substantial justice is not defeated merely on technical grounds. It held that the reasons furnished by the assessee constituted sufficient cause for condonation of the delay.
The Tribunal further noted that both the assessment order and the appellate order had been passed without the benefit of complete documentary evidence from the assessee. Since the dispute essentially concerned verification of agricultural income and the assessee had expressed willingness to produce all relevant supporting documents, the Tribunal considered it appropriate to grant another opportunity in the interest of natural justice.
Setting aside the impugned appellate order, the ITAT restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal directed the assessee to furnish all supporting documents necessary to substantiate the agricultural income claimed in the return so that the issue could be examined afresh on merits.
Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy
To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.
