Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeal was filed by the Assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) which dismissed the appeal due to a delay of 3 years and 8 months. The delay was partly attributed to the Covid-19 pandemic and the demise of the Assessee's counsel.
Held
The Tribunal held that the Assessee had not filed a proper application with supporting documents for condonation of delay. However, considering the circumstances, the case was remanded back to the Ld. Commissioner for fresh adjudication, including considering the condonation of delay with appropriate application and documents.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal should be dismissed in limine for delay, or if the delay should be condoned and the appeal adjudicated on merits given the circumstances.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY
O R D E R
Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 15.07.2025, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short “Ld. Commissioner”) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2018-19.
It appears from the impugned order that there was delay of 3 years and 8 months (1391days) starting from 16.05.2021 to 05.02.2025. Admittedly the Hon’ble Apex in suo motu case no. 3/2023 has excluded/waived the Covid-19 period i.e. from 15.03.2020 to 27.02.2022 from the limitation period, if any expired, during that time and therefore, said period is liable to be
It is also admitted fact as stated by the Assesse that the Ld. Counsel, who was handling the case, was also affected by Covid-19 and ultimately expired, which resulted into non-compliance of notices and/or non-filing of appeal, before the Ld. Commissioner in time.
Though the Ld. Commissioner has passed the detailed order, however, it is a fact that Assessee without filing any proper application alongwith any document and duly shown affidavit substantiating the reason for condonation of delay, simply mentioned the fact qua delay in Form 35.
Therefore, the Ld. Commissioner, on the aforesaid reasons was constrained to decide the appeal in limine and without admitting the same and dismissing in limine, for want of limitation.
The Assessee has claimed that leniency may be observed and one opportunity be given by remanding the case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner, for adjudication afresh.
On the contrary, the Ld. Dr. refuted the claim of the Assessee for remand of the case for decision afresh.
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances in totality just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice and assessment order, which is also more or less ex-parte and in the absence of relevant document, the issue involved also remained to Mr. Santosh Ganpat Bhor be adjudicated in its right perspective and proper manner and therefore, this Court is inclined to remand the instant case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, on limitation involved, by considering appropriate application alongwith duly sworn affidavit and other supporting documents, which the Assessee undertakes to file before him. In the event of condoning the delay, the Ld. Commissioner shall decide the appeal on merit.
Thus, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 18.09.2025.