Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S.
This appeal is filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015-16 against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–15, New Delhi, dated 30.09.2019.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
“1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld CIT(A) has grossly erred in sustaining an addition amounting to Rs.3,87,197/- as disallowed expenses in the nature of personal or capital u/s 37(1) of the I.T Act.1961 related to the assessee, even though the same had already been added back by the assessee in its computation of Income, thus leading to the same amount being added twice.
2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the condonation of delay filled by the assessee as the assessment order was misplaced by the advocate.
That the Order of the CIT(A) is bad in law and on the facts of the case.
4. That we will be allowed to alter, amend or add fresh ground of appeal at the time of hearing.
5. The appellant prays that the penalty be deleted.”
3. The assessee is aggrieved by the order dated 30/09/2019 passed by Ld.CIT (A), wherein the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the Appeal on the grounds of delay in latches and also for non prosecution.
None appeared for the assessee. By considering the issues involved in the Appeal, by looking into the material on record and on hearing the Ld. DR, we are inclined to dispose the Appeal.
The Assessment proceedings have been initiated against the Assessee and an assessment order came to be passed on 31-03-2015 under Section 143(3) of the Act by making disallowance u/s. 37(1) of the Act at Rs.3,87,197/- and further disallowed the ESIC and PF employees contribution u/s. 2(24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act at Rs. 2322/-.
4. As against the Assessment Order dated 31/03/2015, the Assessee has preferred an Appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 135 days. The assessee has assigned reasons for condoning the delay is that, ‘the Assessment order has been misplaced by the Advocate and has not handed over the same to the assessee and the assessee came to know about passing of the assessment order only when the assessee was served with the penalty Notice on 30-05- 2018 and thereafter filed the Appeal’. The Ld.CIT(A) was not convinced with the reasons assigned for the delay and found the same as not a reasonable cause in filing the Appeal belatedly. Further, since the assessee has not attended the appellate proceedings, Ld CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal without deciding the Appeal on merit.
5. In our opinion, by considering the reasons assigned by the Assessee for condoning the delay in filing appeal before the CIT (A), the Ld. CIT (A) ought to have taken liberal view and condoned the delay of 135 days in filing the Appeal and should have decided the Appeal on merit. We are of the view that, if the delay in filing the Appeal is condoned and remand the matter to the CIT(A) for deciding the Appeal on merit, the substantial justice would be render. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the Appeal before the CIT (A) and allow the Ground No. 2 of the assessee for statistical purpose with a direction to the CIT (A) to dispose off the matter on merit. Needless to say that, the Assessee shall be provided with the opportunity of being heard. Since we have remanded the matter to the file of CIT (A) to decide the Appeal on merits, the ground No.1 of the Assessee requires no adjudication at our hands.
In the result, the Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26th July, 2022