PANKAJ KUMAR JAIN,DELHI vs. ITO, DELHI

Ms. Jigna Jain, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the CIT(A) has dismissed appeal of assessee in limine without condoning delay of 28 days. The ld. Counsel submits that the assessee has prima facie good case on merits and if an opportunity is allowed the assessee would present her case before the CIT(A).

Both sides heard, orders of the lower authorities examined. Undisputedly, appeal filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) was time barred by 28 days. As per the impugned order no reasons for delay in filing of appeal were given by the assessee. In fact it is alleged that no application for condonation of delay was filed by the assessee. No material is brought on record by the assessee/appellant to controvert said observations of the First Appellate Authority.

Considering facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to restore this appeal to the CIT(A). The assessee shall furnish application seeking condonation of delay citing reasons causing delay in filing of appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) shall decide said application keeping in view the law expounded by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on condonation of delay in the case of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. 167 ITR 471 and in the case of Ram Nath Sao & Gobardhan Sao and Ors., 2002 SCC (3) 195/2002 SCR (2) 77. Thereafter, the CIT(A) shall decide appeal of the assessee on merits, if the said application is allowed.

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.