PATLIPUTRA AUTOMOBILES,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PATNA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT. It also set aside the ex parte order of the CIT(A) and restored the appeal to the CIT(A)'s file for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT which was time-barred by 45 days due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte as they could not appear due to the pandemic.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT should be condoned due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without considering the pandemic's impact on the assessee's appearance.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA ” BENCH, VIRTUAL
Before: Shri A. T. Varkey, JM]
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld.CIT(A), Hazaribagh dated 20.08.2020 for AY 2013-14.
This appeal of assessee is time barred by 45 days and a condonation petition has been filed. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause due to Covid – 19 pandemic in not filing the appeal on time, so it prayed for condoning the delay which is attributable to restrictions imposed by Covid-19. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the application for condoning the delay, it is noted that the assessee was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause due to Covid-19 pandemic in not filing the appeal on time. Therefore, I condone the delay of 45 days and admit the appeal for hearing.
At the outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee Shri Ajay Kumar Rastogi, Sr. Advocate drew our attention to the fact that the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order. Thereafter, he drew our attention to page no. 4 of the impugned order and submitted that from a perusal of the same it can be noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has taken note of the last date fixed for hearing i.e. on 30.06.2020. According to the Ld. AR, this date of hearing was in the midst of Covid-19 pandemic. Therefore, the assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte. Therefore, he prayed that the matter may be restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). I find force in the submission of the Ld. AR and since the last hearing was fixed on Patliputra Automobiles, AY 2013-14 30.06.2020 which was in the midst of Covid-19 pandemic, therefore, assessee has just reason not to appear before the Ld. CIT(A), so we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 17th September, 2021.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026