" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI \n \nBEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER \n AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER \n \n \n ITA No. 6329/Mum/2024 \n Assessment Year 2017-18 \nNayab Siddiqui \n \nR.N. 704, Lakhpati Bhavan, Dr. \nEmoses Road, Mahalaxmi Opp. \nSatrast \nMasjid, \nMumbai \n– \n400011. \n \nPAN: CQIPS 8499 H \nVs. \n \nITO - 22(2)(1), Piramal \nChamber, \nParel, \nMaharashtra-400012. \n \n (Appellant) (Respondent) \n \n \nPresent for: \nAssessee by \n: Shri Vimal Punmiya \nRevenue by \n \n: Shri Leyaqat Ali, Sr. DR \n \nDate of Hearing \n: 25.02.2025 \nDate of Pronouncement \n: 21.03.2025 \n \nO R D E R \n \nPER AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: \n \n \nThe appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2017-18 \nis directed against the order dated 21.06.2024 passed by the \nNational Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. The assessee has \nraised the following grounds of appeal: \n“1. The Ld CIT(A) erred in making an addition of Rs.30,00,000/-u/s 69 \ntreating the same as source of income for purchase of property and \nadded to the income of the assessee. \n2. The Ld CIT(A) erred in making an addition of Rs.45,90,000/- u/s \n56(2)(vii)(b) treating the same as difference between the Stamp Duty \nValue and purchase value and added to the income of the assessee. \n3. The Ld CIT(A) erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the \nincome tax act. \n4. The Ld CIT(A) erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 272A(1)(d) of \nthe income tax act. \n\n \nITA No. 6329/Mum/2024 \n Nayab Siddiqui \nA.Y. 2017-18 \n \n2 \n5. The Ld CIT(A) erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of \nthe income tax act. \n6. The Ld CIT(A) erred in charging interest 234A,234B and 234C of the \nact. \n7. The Appellant craves liberty to add, amend, and alter and / or \nwithdraw any of the above grounds of appeal.” \n2. \nFact in brief is that return of income declaring total income of \nRs. 3,41,255/- was filed on 25.03.2018. Subsequently, the case of \nthe assessee was reopened by issuing of notice u/s 148 of the Act \non 30.06.2021 on the basis of information received that assessee \nhas purchased an immovable property on 29.04.2016 for a \nconsideration of Rs. 30 lakh whereas the Stamp Value Authority \nhas determined the value of property at Rs. 75,90,000/-. \nAccordingly, the AO has added an amount of Rs. 45,90,000/- u/s \n56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. \n3. \nThe assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). However, the \nld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the appeal on merit and dismissed \nthe same on the ground that there was a delay of 50 days in filing \nof the appeal. \n4. \nBefore us, the ld. Counsel filed an affidavit dated 20.02.2025 \nby which it is submitted that due to chronic sickness of the \nmother of the assessee there was delay of 50 days in filing the \nappeal before the ld. CIT(A), however, the ld. CIT(A) has not \ncondoned the delay without any valid reason and requested to \nprovide opportunity to the assessee at the level of First Appellate \nAuthority for deciding the case of the assessee on merit \n\n \nITA No. 6329/Mum/2024 \n Nayab Siddiqui \nA.Y. 2017-18 \n \n3 \n5. \nHeard both the sides and perused the material on record. It is \nnoticed that before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee has categorically \nreported in Form No. 35 that there was a delay of 50 days in filing \nthe appeal because of sickness of his mother of the assessee as the \nassessee engaged in getting her treatment from doctors. The ld. \nCIT(A) has not condoned the marginal delay in filing the appeal \nand dismissed the appeal of the assessee without adjudicating the \nmatter on merit. We find that ld. CIT(A) has not considered the \ndecision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector \nLand Acquisition vs Mst. Katiji & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 460 of 1987 \ndated 19.12.1987 properly wherein held that sufficient cause for \nthe purpose of condonation of delay should be interpreted with a \nview to do even handed justice on merit in preference to the \napproach which scuttles a decision on merit. \n6. \nLooking to the above facts and findings, we restore the case \nof the assessee to the file of the First Appellate Authority for \ndeciding on merit as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act. Needless \nto say that due opportunity should be given to the assessee. \n7. \nIn the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for \nstatistical purposes. \nOrder pronounced in the open court on 21.03.2025. \n \n \n Sd/- \n \n \nSd/- \n (ANIKESH BANERJEE) (AMARJIT SINGH) \n JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER \n \nMumbai, Dated: 21.03.2025 \nBiswajit, Sr. P.S. \n \n\n \nITA No. 6329/Mum/2024 \n Nayab Siddiqui \nA.Y. 2017-18 \n \n4 \n \nCopy to: \n \n1. The Appellant: \n \n2. The Respondent: \n \n3. The CIT, \n \n4. The DR \n \n \n \n \n//True Copy// \n \n[ \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n By Order \n \n \n Assistant Registrar \n ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n"