ASTAR METALS P LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 3(1), DELHI

Shri Somil Agarwal, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) has dismissed appeal of this assessee in limine on ground of limitation. He stated, admittedly the appeal was time barred by 1985 days before the First Appellate Authority. The assessee had received intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act dated 10/6/2019 making adjustment of Rs.11,22,000 in business income of the assessee. The assessee had filed an application seeking condonation of delay in filing of appeal. The delay occurred on account of Covid 19 pandemic followed by medical exigencies as the assessee had suffered severe knee injury. To substantiate his contention the ld. Counsel placed on record copy of application for condemnation of delay

Per Contra Shri Manoj Kumar representing the department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing the appeal of assessee. The Learned DR submits that the appeal was filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) with an inordinate delay of 1985 days. No plausible reason was given by the assessee causing delay in filing appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A), therefore, was right in dismissing appeal on the ground of limitation.

Both sides heard, orders of the Lower authorities perused. The CIT(A) has dismissed appeal of the assessee in liminie on the ground of limitation. Admittedly, the appeal was filed with a delay of 1985 days before the First Appellate Authority, the assessee has given reasons for delay in filing of the appeal. The delay in filing of the appeal is attributed to Covid 19 pandemic followed by medical exigencies. The Honorable Supreme Court of India has time and again held that acceptance of reasons given for delay in filing of appeal should be the rule and refusal an exception. Hyper-technical and pedantic approach should not be adopted for dismissing reasons given for delay in filing of appeal. Considering the reasons given by assessee resulting in delay in filing of appeal before the CIT(A), the delay of 1985 days is condoned.

Without commenting on merits of the addition, I deem it appropriate to restore this issue back to the Assessing Officer for re-examination. The Assessing officer before making fresh assessment shall grant reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.