MAA MAHESWARI HERBAL AND SPICES FARMS PRIVATE LIMITED,BARGARH vs. DCIT CIR.-2(1), SAMBALPUR

Shri Bijay Banerjee, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Shri Bijay Banerjee, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Shri Bijay Banerjee, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.

It was submitted by ld AR that there was It was submitted by ld AR that there was delay of 3184 days in delay of 3184 days in filing the appeal before the ld CIT(A). It was the submission tha filing the appeal before the ld CIT(A). It was the submission tha filing the appeal before the ld CIT(A). It was the submission that the delay had occurred as the business of the assessee had been closed and th had occurred as the business of the assessee had been closed and th had occurred as the business of the assessee had been closed and the assessee was unable to access the assessee was unable to access the assessee’s tax portal. On the basis of assessee’s tax portal. On the basis of above submission of ld AR, the Bench had directed to ld Sr DR to get the above submission of ld AR, the Bench had directed to ld Sr DR to get the above submission of ld AR, the Bench had directed to ld Sr DR to get the P a g e 1 | 3 details of the returns, if any, filed by the assessee in the subsequent years. Ld Sr DR has placed before me the letter from the Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Sambalpur dated 4th July, 2023, wherein, it is mentioned that the assessee has filed its return of income last for the assessment year 2007-08, after which, no returns have been filed by the assessee. Ld Sr DR submitted that the law on limitation is a substantial law and delay should not be condoned.

I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts in the present case clearly shows that the assessee has not been filing its return of income for the subsequent years and admittedly, the assessee is not having any business activities. This clearly proves the claim of the assessee that the assessee’s business has been closed down. This being so, I am of the view that the reasons given by ld AR for the delay in filing the appeal before the ld CIT(A) are genuine. In these circumstances, I condone the delay of 3184 days in filing the appeal before the ld CIT(A) and restore the issues on merits to the file of the ld CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 11/07/2023. Sd/- (George Mathan) JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 11/07/2023