REDI PORT LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI
IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH,
MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
&
SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Redi Port Limited
107,
10th
Floor
Earnest
House,
NCPA
Marg
Nariman Point, Mumbai -
400 021, Maharashtra v/s.
बनाम
Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals), Circle-3(3)(1)
Room
No.
609,
6th
Floor,
Aayakar
Bhavan,
Maharishi
Karve Road, Mumbai – 400051,
Maharashtra
स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AADCR6980N
Appellant/अपीलार्थी
..
Respondent/प्रतिवादी
Appellant by :
Ms. Vinita Nara,AR
Respondent by :
Shri Umashankar Prasad, (CIT-DR)
Date of Hearing
17.09.2025
Date of Pronouncement
10.11.2025
आदेश / O R D E R
PER PRABHASH SHANKAR [A.M.] :-
The present appeal arising from the appellate order dated
16.06.2025 is filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless
Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] pertaining to assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act,
1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] dated 25.03.2025 for the Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2023-24. P a g e | 2
A.Y. 2023-24
Redi Port Limited
The grounds of appeal are as under:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal as time-barred without considering the statutory exclusion of time under the second proviso to Section 249(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. That the Learned CIT(A) erred in not granting an opportunity of hearing before dismissing the appeal, in contravention of Section 250(1) of the Act and the principles of natural justice. 3. Facts of the case are that the ld.Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act in this case, determining total income at Rs 6,39,83,530/-,as against the returned income of Rs 5,55,29,000/-by making various additions and disallowances. The ld.CIT(A) observed that the appeal filed before him by the assessee against the assessment order was delayed by 30 days. He further observed from the Form no.35 that the assessee did not mention such delay. Therefore, applying the provisions of section 249(2) of the Act, he dismissed the appeal in limine without adjudicating the appeal on merits.
Before us, the ld.AR submitted that the assessee filed an application in Form 68 on 15.04.2025, seeking immunity from penalty under section 270AA of the Act. The AO passed an order on 27.05.2025, rejecting the said immunity application. Pursuant to such rejection, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) on 04.06.2025 against the P a g e | 3 A.Y. 2023-24
Redi Port Limited assessment order. However, the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adjudication on merits, solely on the ground that the appeal was time- barred. It is contented that the second proviso to section 249(2) of the Act provides that the time during which an application under section 270AA of the Act remains pending, shall be excluded while computing the limitation period for filing an appeal.
We find that the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without even affording any opportunity of hearing to the assessee to explain the alleged delay. Consequently, he failed to adjudicate the issues raised in the grounds of appeal and did not examine the materials available on record. Such dismissal without deciding the appeal on merits is contrary to the principles of natural justice. It is settled law that it is the duty of the appellate authority to dispose of an appeal on merits after considering the material on record, even if the appellant fails to appear. 6. Considering the entirety of the facts and the circumstances of the case and in the interest of principles of natural justice and fair play, we consider it appropriate to send the entire matter back to the file of the ld.CIT(A) in the light of above discussion, granting opportunity to the assessee to advance the arguments and submissions before him, in P a g e | 4 A.Y. 2023-24
Redi Port Limited connection with the merits of the case. Accordingly, in the substantial interest of justice, we set aside the appellate order and restore the entire matter back to the ld.CIT(A) for passing the appellate order afresh after allowing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee who is also directed to attend the proceedings before him and cooperate in furnishing relevant details etc as sought.
7. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 10/11/2025. SANDEEP GOSAIN
PRABHASH SHANKAR
(न्याययक सदस्य /JUDICIAL MEMBER)
(लेखाकार सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
Place: म ुंबई/Mumbai
ददनाुंक /Date 10.11.2025
Lubhna Shaikh / Steno
आदेश की प्रयियलयि अग्रेयिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant
2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.
3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT
4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT,
Mumbai
P a g e | 5
A.Y. 2023-24
Redi Port Limited
गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.
सत्यावपि प्रवि ////
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.