Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which had dismissed their appeal for non-deduction of TDS. The assessee's original appeal before the CIT(A) was filed with a significant delay of 1175 days, which was further extended by 389 days even after excluding the pandemic period.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the initial delay of 7 days in filing the present appeal before it, finding the reasons to be bonafide. However, for the substantial delay before the CIT(A), the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration of the condonation application, providing the assessee an opportunity to submit supporting evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned despite the assessee's failure to properly explain the delay and provide supporting evidence.
Sections Cited
250, 201(1), 201(1A), 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: SHRI BEENA PILLAI & SMT.RENU JAUHRI
Date of Hearing 06.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 28.10.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.M.] :-
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ADDL/JCIT (A)- 4 Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 12.12.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] for the Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2018-19.
The grounds of appeal are as follows:
“Being aggrieved by the order dated 12.12 2024 passed by the learned Addl./Jt Commissioner of Income Tax4, Kolkata, ["Ld. FAA"] u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("Act"), your appellant prefers this appeal, among others, on the following grounds of appeal, each of which is without prejudice to, and independent of, the other:
1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. FAA erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal before him. The appellant submits that the Ld. FAA failed to appreciate that the delay was caused due to reasonable and sufficient reasons, and therefore, he ought to have condoned the delay Your appellant, therefore, prays that the aforesaid delay may kindly be condoned, and the matter be restored to the file of the id. FAA for adjudication on its merits.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. FAA erred in not directing the Ld. AO not to treat the appellant as an assessee-in-default for not deducting tax at source on expenditure of Rs. 1,06,74,976/-. Your appellant, therefore, prays that the demand of sum of Rs. 14,41,120/-raised u/s.201(1)/201(1A) be cancelled. Your appellant craves leave to alter, modify, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal, or to add one or more new ground(s), as may be necessary”
At the outset, it is seen that the appeal is delayed by 7 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation stating that the appeal fees was paid on 11.02.2025 and the challan was also forwarded to the tax consultant for further action. However, the tax consultant was unwell and therefore could not file the appeal before due date, resulting in a minor delay of 7 days.
Considering the facts and circumstances explained by the assessee, we hereby condone the delay of 7 days as the same appears to be unintentional and for bonafide reasons.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not made TDS on payment of interest of Rs. 1,06,74,906/- during F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to A.Y. 2018-
Accordingly, vide order u/s. 201(1)/201(1A) dated 04.03.2020, the ITO, TDS ward 2(1)(2), Mumbai(hereinafter referred to as the ‘AO’) held the assessee to be an assessee-in-default for non deduction of TDS of Rs. 10,67,497/- and directed it to pay this amount along with interest of Rs. 3,73,624/-.
4.2 Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before ld. CIT(A). However, the appeal was filed on 20.06.2023 after a delay of 1175 days. The assessee had submitted an affidavit for condonation wherein it mentioned the reason of delay as Pandemic Lockdown. Ld. CIT(A) issued several notices to the assessee, but no compliance was made nor any application for adjournment was filed. Accordingly, ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 12.12.2024 dismissed the appeal in limine noting that even after excluding the pandemic period, the delay of 389 days was not properly explained by the assessee in its affidavit for condonation nor any supporting documentary evidences were filed. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Tribunal.
We have heard the rival submissions and considered the material placed on record. Before us, Ld. AR has requested for providing one more opportunity to the assessee to explain the reasons of delay before ld. CIT(A). In the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration of the application for condonation of delay after giving due opportunity to the assessee to submit necessary supporting evidences in this regard. The assessee is also directed to make requisite compliance before ld. CIT(A).
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order Pronounced in Open Court on 28.10.2025