, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad , श्री विजय पाल राि उपाध् यक्ष एिं , श्री मिुसूदन सािडिया लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष ।

BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.804/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-17)

M/s. Kausalya Agro Farms and Income Tax Officer, Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs.

Ward-2(1), Hyderabad.

Hyderabad.

PAN:AAGCS7285L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by:

रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 14/10/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 17/10/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M. :

This appeal is filed by M/s. Kausalya Agro Farms and Developers Pvt. Ltd. (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 23.01.2025 for the A.Y. 2016-17.

2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 39 days in filing of the present appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has filed a condonation petition along with a copy of affidavit, explaining the reasons for the said delay. The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that during the relevant period, the Executive Director of the company, who was looking after the income tax matters, was suffering from severe neck pain radiating to both upper limbs and other related health complications. The doctor had advised him complete rest for about one and a half months, due to which the necessary steps for filing the appeal could not be taken within the prescribed period of limitation. It was further submitted that the medical certificate and supporting evidence in this regard have been filed along with the condonation petition. The Ld. AR thus contended that the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional, but occurred due to bona fide reasons beyond the control of the assessee. He, therefore, prayed that the delay may kindly be condoned and the appeal admitted for adjudication on merits.

3. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) did not raise any serious objection to the request for condonation of delay.

4. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. In the present case, the reason for delay has been duly explained by the assessee, supported by medical evidence. We find that the delay was caused due to unavoidable medical reasons and not due to any deliberate inaction or negligence. Further, the Department has not raised any serious objection to the condonation. Accordingly, we are satisfied that the assessee has shown sufficient cause for the delay in filing of the appeal. Therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, the delay of 39 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.

5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :

6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company which filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2016–17 on 13.10.2016, declaring total income of Rs.2,96,250/-. The case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), and accordingly, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued by the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) on 12.03.2021. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the assessee filed its reply on 12.01.2022, enclosing copies of the books of account, computation of total income, and list of bank accounts. However, the Ld. AO was not satisfied with the explanation offered by the assessee and, accordingly, issued a show-cause

notice along with a draft assessment order, proposing a disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Since the assessee did not furnish any response to the said show-cause notice, the Ld. AO completed the assessment under section 147 read with sections 144 and 144B of