Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2021-22 was dismissed by the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-11 on grounds of limitation, without deciding the merits of the case. The assessee contended that there was reasonable and sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal, citing prior pursuit of a rectification under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act and a lack of opportunity of being heard.
Held
The Tribunal found that reasonable cause existed for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the delay was condoned, and the matter was remitted back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on the merits, after providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity of being heard and passing a speaking order.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeal on limitation without considering reasonable cause for delay or providing an opportunity of being heard.
Sections Cited
154, 249
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “E”, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA
The Assessee has filed the instant Appeal against the Order of the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A)-11, Delhi dated 28.10.2024, relating to assessment year 2021-22.
At the outset, it is submitted by the Ld. AR that Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) has erred by dismissing the appeal of the assessee on account limitation, against the Intimation Order without appreciating that the assessee had indeed presented a reasonable and sufficient cause explaining the delay in filing the said appeal. It was the further contention, that the Ld. Addl/JCI(A) has not decided the appeal on the merits of the case. It is further submitted that Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) has erred in failing to grant the assessee an opportunity of being heard and passed the impugned order which is in complete violation of principles of natural justice. It was further pleaded that genuine reasons have been submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that the delay is occurred on account of opting of alternative remedy available under section 154 of the Act by filing a rectification application i.e. within the period of 30 days of passing the impugned order by the CPC. Thus, the assessee had reasonable and sufficient cause due to which assessee was unable to prefer an appeal under section 249 of the Act. Hence, it was requested to condone the delay in dispute and thereafter matter may be remitted back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, after passing a speaking order.
Upon hearing both the parties and perusing the records, we find that reasonable cause has been attributed for delay in dispute in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), hence, we condone the delay in dispute before the Ld. CIT(A) and accordingly, in the interest of justice, remit back the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, after passing a speaking order and give adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.