SHARADABAI CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

The Ld. AR argued and stated that the assessee filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay for 342 days. The reasons of delay was duly explained of the assessee seeking permission before Ld. CIT(A) for condoning the delay. The Ld. CIT(A) had made the observations in the impugned appellate order related to the assessee’s submission for condoning the delay for filing appeal. The relevant paragraph contended the assessee’s submission is reproduced as below: “3.1. The present appeal is filed against the Order/Notice dated 16/07/2019, which was served upon the Appellant on 04/02/2020. As per the provisions of the relevant Act, Section 249(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which provides a statutory period of 30 days for filing an appeal, the appeal was due to be filed latest by 03/03/2020 (if the date of service mentioned by the appellant 04/02/2020 is considered). The appeal, however, was filed on 11/02/2021, resulting in a delay of 342 days. The appellant has filed a petition for condonation of this delay, citing the following grounds: 1. Ill-health and unfortunate death of the Managing Trustee (Shri Guru pur Arvind Rao). 2. Nationwide lockdown declared in March 2020, which continued till February 2021 in Maharashtra. 3. The other trustees being senior citizens were advised to stay indoors.”

The Ld. DR argued and stands in favor of the revenue authorities. The Ld. DR contended that the assessee filed the Form No.10B, so the assessee is not eligible to claim the deduction u/sec 11 of the Act.

We have heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. The assessee filed the return by declaring total income nil after claiming exemption u/sec. of the Act. The return was processed and the exemption u/sec. 11 was duly denied due to delay in filing Form No. 10B. The assessee filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay for 342 days. But the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the appeal of the assessee on the ground of limitation. Considering the merit of the case, the assessee explained the delay before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) had taken cognizance of the said submission and reproduced the assessee’s prayer in the impugned appellate order. We find that the reasonable opportunity for the assessee was denied. The assesse had explained the delay in filing appeal. Considering the facts of the case and interest of substantial justice we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee is directed to file the affidavit along 3 with an appropriate application seeking condonation of delay before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) is directed to consider the assessee’s application for condonation of delay in accordance with law in lenient approach and passed a reasoned and speaking order after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on merit of the addition involved in the case and the Ld. CIT(A) shall adjudicate the matter independently and uninfluenced by any observations contained herein. Needless to state that the assessee shall afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing in the set aside appellate proceeding and shall be permitted to place all relevant documents and evidence on record. At the same time, the assessee is directed to remain diligent and full cooperative to ensure the expeditious disposal of appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) have sufficient adjudication in accordance with law.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.1101/Mum/2026 is allowed for statistical purpose.