IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1154/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Subha Hariharan Income Tax Officer, Plot No. 4 B 503/504, Ward 35(3)(4), Dosti Elite Tower -B Mumbai Vs.

Next to Sion Telephone Exchange Sion (W), Mumbai – 400022 (PAN: ACMPH5705R)

(Assessee) (Respondent)

Present for:

Assessee : Mr. Ruturaj Gurjar, Advocate Revenue : Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DR (Virtually appeared)

Date of Hearing : 30.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 13.10.2025

O R D E R

PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld.

CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1071531320(1), dated 24.12.2024 passed against the assessment order by Income-tax Officer, Ward – 35(3)(4), Mumbai, u/s. 144 r.w.s.147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 27.12.2018 for Assessment Year 2011-12.

2. Grounds taken by the assessee are reproduced as under:

“1. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in passing the order dated 24/12/2024 without giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to represent its case.

2. The Ld CIT (A) has also erred in Disposing of the appeal without appreciating the circumstances under which the (Appeal as per Form-35) could not be filed.

3. Without Prejudice to the above grounds: the Ld. CIT (A) has also erred in not appreciating the fact that the Appellant had filed a letter stating Grounds for condonation of Delay: the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have given reasonable opportunity to the explain petitioner's case.

4. Each of the above ground be considered as separate from the other grounds.

5. The appellant reserves its right to add to, alter, amend, modify or delete any of the grounds taken in this appeal..

3. All the ground nos. 1 to 3 are in respect of dismissal of the first appeal ignoring the submissions made by the assessee for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and not giving reasonable opportunity to present the case.

4. From the perusal of the order of ld. CIT(A), we note from para 2.3 that the delay in filing the first appeal was not condoned and the appeal was thus dismissed without dealing with the merits of the case. 5. Assessee had furnished grounds for condonation of delay before the ld. CIT(A) which are extracted below:

1. The assessee is a bonafide citizen of United States of America (USA) and is in the process of filing the appeal against the order passed by the assessing of-

ficer.

2. The delay in filing the appeal has been an account of following genuine rea-

sons and the appeal may be admitted.

a. The assessee is a citizen of USA and had left India in year 2007 for stud-

ies and later settled out of India.

b. Since the assessee had settled out of India and never had any source of income in India, she was not aware of any income tax proceedings being ini-

tiated against her.

c. The assessee was opening new NRO account online, wherein she already had one joint account with her father, it was bought to her notice that her joint account was frozen by the Income Tax Department on account of some tax liability to be paid by the assessee.

d. It was only after such information, the assessee came to know about the case of her being selected for assessment and since no one attended the mat-

ter, the case of completed on ex-parte basis leading to such high demand.

e. The assessee had approached Income Tax Department to provide the copy of order in order to take further necessary steps for removal of demand.

f. On continuous follow up with the Income Tax Department, the assessee could obtain the order only on 15.06.2023.

g. The copy of all the letters written by the assessee for obtaining the order is attached herewith. (Pl refer Annexure 1)

h. Due to absence of any information of assessment proceedings against the assessee, the assessee could not avail the timely remedy under the Income Tax Ac