MANISH KUMAR GUPTA,REWARI vs. ITO WARD-1, , NARNAUL

At the time of hearing, it came up that the appeal ITA 1813 and 1812 has been filed before this Tribunal with a delay of 52 days and an application for condonation is filed. In the light of the fact that the delay is not of exceptional period, the same is condoned and the appeals are admitted for hearing.

On hearing both the sides, we find that before the NFAC the assessee has failed to appear. Although the ld. DR defended the order of the NFAC submitting that sufficient notices were issued, however, we find that the assessee’s request in all the appeals for adjournment have not been considered without any reasoned finding. Then we find that in assessee’s appeal for AY 2011-12 are also dismissed for delayed filing of appeal. Also summarily on merits. The orders are not sustainable under law. Accordingly, it is an appropriate case to give the assessee an opportunity to contest on merits and law, after explaining the reasons for delay in filing appeals before NFAC. The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. The issues in appeal in ITA No.1811/Del/2025 and the those in ITA No.1812/Del/2025 of AY 2011-12, arising out of the penalty order are remitted to the files of the NFAC to give the opportunity of being hearing to the assessee and decide the application for condonation of delay afresh and then proceed to decide in accordance with the law. In ITA 1813, the issue on merits as well as law, are restored to the files of the NFAC to give a fresh opportunity of being heard and decide in accordance with the law. 3