PRIYADARSHINI MAHILA MAHAVIDAYALAYA JALDA,JALDA ROURKELA vs. ACIT,RANGE-1, SAMBALPUR

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

At the time of hearing, Ld AR submitted that the appeal filed by the assessee before the first appellate authority was time barred by 833 days. It was the submission that as the appeal was not filed within the time, the assessee had submitted that due to limited knowledge regarding the tax matter the person concerned handling the tax matter could not know the deficiency regarding the filing of the appeal. It was the submission that when the bank account of the assessee was attached by the Department, it came to know that the assessment order has been passed by the Assessing Officer and against the said order, an appeal had to be filed. Thereafter, the assessee filed the condonation petition, which was not considered in favour of the assessee. It was prayed that the delay in filing the appeal before the first appellate authority be condoned and direction may be given to the first appellate authority to decide the appeal on merits. In reply, ld Sr DR opposed to the request of ld AR of the assessee.

On consideration of the rival submissions, we are of the considered view that the reasons enumerated by the assessee for not filing the appeal before the first appellate authority have not been found to be false. So, it cannot be said that the delay was due to the negligence and due to the inaction on the part of the assessee, which could have been avoided. Further the assessee was not going to gain any benefit because of the delayed filing of appeal and its conduct was not contumacious. Thus, we

A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that the first appellate authority has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of condonation of delay and there is no adjudication on the merits of the case. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice, we remand back the matter to the record of the first appellate authority for deciding the appeal afresh on merits after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to co-operate with the first appellate authority in deciding the appeal on merits.

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