ACCURATE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, TDS, NOIDA

At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that there was a delay of 151 days in filing appeal before the CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has rejected the application filed for condonation of delay and passed an ex-parte order, dismissing the appeal. 3. Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that the ld CIT(A) rejected the assessee application for condonation of delay of 151 days and passed an ex-parte order. The ld. CIT(A), did not appreciate the explanation submitted by the assessee and no merits were dealt with while passing the appellate order as per the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. 5. In such factual matrix, we are of the view that the reasons stated by the ld. counsel for the assessee regarding change in tax consultant, seems to be reasonable and sufficient cause. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing appeal before the CIT(A). Further, in view of the above facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the considered opinion that the issues be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the issues afresh after allowing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Needless to say