" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,‘SMC ‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G.M. DOSS, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.7902/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year :2020-21) Dhanshri Vilas Gaikwad A-108, Asawari, Sinhagad Road Nanded City, Vadgaon Budruk Pune- 411 041 Vs. ITO Ward 27(1)(1), Mumbai PAN/GIR No.AMCPG1005F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Saket Sharma (Virtual Appearance) Revenue by Ms. Jayshree Thakur, SR DR Date of Hearing 28/09/2026 Date of Pronouncement 28/09/2026 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.02.2026 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for Assessment Year 2020–21. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine, holding that it Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.7902/Mum/2026 Dhanshri Vilas Gaikwad 2 had been filed with a delay of 134 days and that sufficient cause for condoning the delay had not been shown. The grounds challenging the assessment were, therefore, not examined on their merits. The Assessing Officer had completed the assessment under section 147 read with section 144, determining the assessee’s total income at ₹40,13,660, which included an addition of ₹38,00,000 under section 69 read with section 115BBE. 2. The learned counsel submitted that the assessee is a housewife, was not conversant with income-tax proceedings or the e-filing portal, and was unaware of notices communicated electronically. It was submitted that she was consequently unable to participate effectively in the reassessment proceedings or pursue her appellate remedy within the prescribed time. The delay, it was urged, was neither wilful nor deliberate. The learned counsel requested that the delay be condoned and the matter restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration after allowing the assessee an effective opportunity to explain the source of the investment and furnish supporting evidence. 3. We have considered the submissions and perused the material on record. The assessment order records that notices were issued electronically and that further steps, including service by post and affixture, were taken following non- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.7902/Mum/2026 Dhanshri Vilas Gaikwad 3 compliance. It also refers to a return filed in response to the notice under section 148 and a bank statement furnished by the assessee. The assessee’s explanation before us is that, notwithstanding these steps, she was not conversant with the electronic proceedings and did not have effective knowledge of the notices or their implications. Having regard to the explanation offered for the delay, the assessee’s stated circumstances and the fact that the appeal was dismissed without consideration of the assessment issues, we are satisfied that the delay of 134 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) deserves to be condoned. 4. We further consider it appropriate, in the interests of justice, to provide the assessee an effective opportunity to place her explanation and supporting material before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the order of the learned CIT(A) is set aside and the assessment order is also set aside. The matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Assessing Officer shall consider the evidence furnished by the assessee, including material relating to the source of the investment and the addition of ₹38,00,000, and pass a speaking order. The assessee shall cooperate with the proceedings and furnish the relevant material. We express no opinion on the merits of the addition. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.7902/Mum/2026 Dhanshri Vilas Gaikwad 4 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 28th September, 2026. Sd/- (G.M. DOSS) Sd/- (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 28/09/2026 KARUNA, sr.ps Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "