YASH DINESH CHOPRA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 41(4)(1), MUMBAI

PER PRABHASH SHANKAR [A.M.] :- The present appeal emanating from the appellate order dated 11.02.2026 is preferred by the assessee against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] pertaining to penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] dated 19.09.2022 for the Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2015-16. P a g e | 2 A.Y. 2015-16 Yash Dinesh Chopra 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:

P a g e | 4 A.Y. 2015-16 Yash Dinesh Chopra The AO accepted return of income i.e Rs. 61,33,340/-but initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for non filing of return of income u/s 139 of the Act for concealment of particular income and finally levied it. Against the said order belated appeal was filed before the CIT(A) and application for condonation of delay was also filed inter alia explaining that he did not have proper knowledge regarding the Income Tax Matters. Since the tax was paid, he did not understand that penalty would be levied separately and he was not aware of the consequence of non filing of the appeal and forgot the same. On receipt of notice u/s 245 of the Act regarding the demand to pay, he understood that penalty was levied and remained payable. After taking proper consultation of Chartered Accountant's advice, he took the action for filling of the appeal. Therefore, appeal is delayed, and the delay is bonafide. The assessee could not benefit by delay in presenting the appeal as the assessee would putting himself in great disadvantageous position as non-adjudication of legal grounds would harm his interest. The ld.CIT(A)has not disposed the delay condonation issue judiciously and without application of mind. He also did not dispose the grounds of appeal on merit. The delay of filling of appeal before CIT(A) may be condoned sympathetically as he is an individual and reason given in affidavit is sufficient reason to condone the delay.

P a g e | 5 A.Y. 2015-16 Yash Dinesh Chopra 6. On careful consideration of the submissions of the assessee, we are of the view that the delay in filing appeal before the ld.CIT(A) was not intentional but due to unavoidable and sufficient cause. In this connection, reliance could be placed on the landmark decision of hon‟ble Supreme Court which inter alia held in Collector, Land Acquisition v Mst. Katiji And Others- 167 ITR 471 (SC) that “ordinarily, a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late……..Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated….Any appeal or any application, other than an application under any of the provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period…. A litigant does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay. In fact, he runs serious risk.” We therefore, condone the delay in fling of the appeal before the appellate authority.

P a g e | 6 A.Y. 2015-16 Yash Dinesh Chopra He failed to adjudicate the issues raised in the grounds of appeal and did not examine the materials available on record. Such dismissal without deciding the appeal on merits is contrary to the principles of natural justice. However, it is equally true that it is the fundamental duty of the assessee to diligently pursue the appeal and comply with the notices and proceedings initiated by the Revenue authorities although in the instant case, there appears to be justifiable reasons for the delay in filing of the appeal before him. As the ld. AR has requested before us that the assessee may be accorded one more opportunity and this request which was not objected by the ld.DR, in such a scenario, we are of the opinion that the scales of justice demand that the matter should be verified and revisited at the level of the ld.CIT(A) and accordingly, after condoning the delay, we set aside the appellate order and the matter is remanded back to him for de novo adjudication while applying the principles of natural justice after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The ground of appeal is, therefore, allowed for statistical purposes.

P a g e | 7 A.Y. 2015-16 Yash Dinesh Chopra Order pronounced in the open court on 23/06/2026. [Justice (Retd.) C. V. BHADANG] [PRABHASH SHANKAR] PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Place: म ुंबई/Mumbai ददनाुंक /Date 23.06.2026 Lubhna Shaikh / Steno

आदेश की प्रतितलति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT,

उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.