Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 206 days due to the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) being mixed up with other papers. The delay was sought to be condoned on the grounds of sufficient cause.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding sufficient cause. It also set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remanded the matter back for a fresh decision after providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal is liable to be condoned and whether the Ld. CIT(A) order passed ex-parte is sustainable.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
The captioned appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 25.04.2024 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi [“Ld.CIT(A)”] in Appeal No.CIT(A), Noida-1/11002/2019-20 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising from the assessment order dated 22.12.2019 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act pertaining to assessment year 2017-18.
At the time of hearing, no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee.
The captioned appeal filed delayed by 206 days for which condonation of delay petition is filed wherein it is stated that the assessee is looking after administration and accounts related activities and the order passed on 25.04.2024 was downloaded from the mail. However, the same was got mixed up with the working papers and could not be handed over to the Ld. Counsel for preparation of the appeal. It is only when some amount was recovered from the bank account of the assessee, the fact of non- filing of appeal come to the notice of assessee and accordingly, the assessee immediately filed the appeal before the Tribunal which was delayed by 206 days. The assessee thus, requested for condonation of delay by contending that it is a sufficient cause and there is no malafide in filing the appeal delayed. He placed reliance on the judgements of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition vs Mst . Katiji & Ors. 167 ITR 471 (SC); Ram Nath Sao @ Ram Nath Sahu and Others vs Gobardhan Sao And Others AIR 2002 SUPREME COURT 1201; and Improvement Trust vs Ujagar Singh reported in 2010 6 SCC 789. The application is further supported by an affidavit wherein the facts narrated in condondation petition are re-affirmed by assessee. Accordingly, the prayer is made for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR vehemently objected for the mission of the appeal.
After considering the facts and the petition of the assessee, we are of the considered view that the appeal of the assessee should be admitted in the interest of justice. Thus, following the above- mentioned judgements of Hon’ble Supreme Court as relied upon, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and admitted the same for adjudication.
From the perusal of the order of Ld.CIT(A), it is seen that Ld.CIT(A) has provided only two opportunities and the assessee failed to file any submissions and the appeal is decided ex-parte on the basis of material available on record. As only two opportunities were provided and it is not clear whether the notices were sent by ld.CIT(A) were served or not thus, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of Ld.CIT(A) and remand back to his file to decide the appeal afresh after providing the assessee reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to appear before Ld.CIT(A) and file all the necessary evidences in support of the grounds of appeal taken in this case.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 29.07.2025.