MUBAARAK ALI,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(1)(5), NOIDA, NOIDA
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMANMubaarak Ali, vs.
PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 29.11.2024 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We proceeded to adjudicate the issue with the assistance of ld. DR of the Revenue. 3. At the time of hearing, we observed from the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee that ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on grounds of delay
2
without appreciating that the assessee, being a senior citizen, did not receive a copy of the assessment order and only became aware of the proceedings when the Department pursued the demand; that the delay in filing the appeal was due to a bona fide clerical error by the legal professional in quoting the date of the assessment order in Form 35; that the assessee had no intention to mislead or misrepresent facts to the Department; that the ld. CIT (A) failed to consider the remand report submitted by the Income Tax Officer and the submissions made by the assessee in response to notices issued during the appellate proceedings; that the ld. CIT (A) failed to apply the principle of liberal construction of law to advance the cause of substantial justice, especially in the light of the assessee’s bona fide efforts to comply with procedural requirements and the lack of any negligence or inaction on his part; that the assessee's death on 20th May 2021 further underscores the need for a sympathetic and equitable approach in resolving this matter, as the legal heir is now pursuing the appeal to ensure justice; and that the assessee prayed for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and requests the ITAT to direct the CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal on merit.
4. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue relied on the orders of the authorities below.
3
5. Considered the submissions of the ld. DR of the Revenue and material placed on record. We observed from the order of ld. CIT (A) that there is a delay of 445 days in filing the appeal and the ld. CIT (A) did not condone the delay for the reason that the assessee has not furnished any sufficient reason for filing the appeal belatedly and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. After going through the submissions made by the assessee in the grounds of appeal and in the interest of justice, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT
(A) and remit the issue to the file of ld. CIT (A). Accordingly, we direct the ld.
CIT (A) to decide the issue on merits as per law, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct assessee to make proper submissions and appear before the ld.CIT (A) on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on this 13TH day of May, 2025
after the conclusion of the hearing. (SATBEER SINGH GODARA)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated:13.05.2025
TS