Delay in Filing Appeal Due to Accountant’s Death Constitutes Sufficient Cause; ITAT Condones 191-Day Delay

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Delhi Condones Delay and Restores Appeal for Fresh Adjudication as sufficient cause is shown and there is neither mala fide intention nor gross negligence for delay in filing of appeal.

The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in providing technical and professional services and has not filed its return under Section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. According to the information available on the Insight Portal, it was indicated that income amounting to Rs 96.51 lakh had escaped assessment so the reassessment proceedings were initiated under Sections 147 and 148 after following the procedure prescribed under Section 148A.

In response to the notice issued under Section 148, the assessee filed its return declaring income of Rs 8.21 lakh but the AO rejected the books of account and made additions aggregating to Rs 18.65 lakh and the total income was assessed at Rs 38.82 lakh. Aggrieved by the reassessment order passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A).

The CIT(A) noted that there was a delay of 191 days in the filing of the appeal and, in the absence of any application seeking condonation of delay, dismissed the appeal.

The assessee submitted an affidavit before the Tribunal explaining that its accountant had died in a road accident on 26 February 2025, which was a day before the reassessment order was passed. Also, the accountant’s email address had been registered on the income-tax portal and thus, the assessee never received the assessment order and became aware of it only in the last week of September 2025, following which he immediately filed the appeal on 3 October 2025.

The Tribunal further observed that the principles of natural justice had been violated and the delay was bona fide. The tribunal condoned the delay of 191 days and restored the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits in accordance with law. The Tribunal also directed the CIT(A) to admit the evidence produced by the assessee and grant an adequate opportunity of hearing to both parties.