TRIPTI AGARWAL,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

ITA No. 278, 279 & 280/Hyd/2023 these appeals for the assessment year 2016-17. Facts involved in all these appeals are similar (except the amount of addition made by the learned Assessing Officer), mostly the grounds of appeal. We, therefore, deem it just and convenient to dispose of these appeals by way of this common order, taking the appeal in as a lead case.

In the affidavits filed in support of the petitions to condone the delay, the assessees stated this fact of the said auditor not being available and went for medical treatment of his mother. It was further stated by the assessees that they were not aware of the time lines of filing appeals and process involved for filing appeals before the Tribunal and was under bonafide impression that it would be taken care of by their auditor. After resuming to work, the auditor of the assessees called up the assessees to discuss about the appeals. Since the auditor was otherwise busy on account of his absence from work because of medical treatment of his mother, he suggested the assessees to approach the present counsel to prepare and file the appeals before the Tribunal.

Learned AR submitted that the non-appearance before the learned CIT(A) is neither wilful nor intentional, but only due to medical emergency of the auditor, who was looking after the tax matters of the assessees. He, therefore, submits that given an opportunity, the assessees are prepared to appear before the learned CIT(A) to prosecute their case diligently. , 279 & 280/Hyd/2023 5. Learned DR vehemently contends that sufficient opportunities were granted by the assessees by the learned CIT(A), but the assessees failed to appear before the learned CIT(A) and, therefore, the delay cannot be condoned. He submitted in the alternative that if for any reason, it is felt that assessees must be given an opportunity, they must be clamped with a condition to co-operate with the authorities for disposal of the matter(s) on merits. 6. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. As per record, it is observed that learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by giving the reason that the assessees did not co-operate with the Department and failed to furnish any bonafide explanation in support of their case. 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances stated above, and also taking into consideration the plea, we are of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be met by remitting the issue back to the file of learned CIT(A) for fresh consideration, by taking all the relevant documents. In these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that giving an opportunity to the assessee to produce all the relevant documents before the learned CIT(A) for fact verification would meet the ends of justice. At the same time, however, we want to indicate our mind to the assessees that this sort of non co-operation will not be without any consequences and for that purpose, we direct the assessees to pay costs of Rs. 6,000/-, namely, @ Rs. 2,000/- in each of the appeal to the credit of the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund, on or before 31/08/2023. Learned CIT(A) will entertain the appeals of the assessees, producing the proof of remitting costs. 8. With this view of the matter, we condone the delay in filing the appeals, quash the impugned orders and restore the issue to the file of the learned CIT(A) to decide it, after hearing the assessee. It is made clear that , 279 & 280/Hyd/2023 it is the last opportunity to the assessees and no further lenience will be taken. Grounds are accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.