MORARI COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. I.T.O., WARD - 5(1), KOLKATA

The appeal is time barred by 4 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The appellant has not sought condonation of delay in Form 35 with documentary evidence. The ld. CIT(Appeals) was of the opinion that in absence of any substantiation, the grounds for condonation of delay as mentioned by the assessee, is merely a bald assertion without any basis, which is not supported by cogent and proper evidence and the same would not, as such, constitute ‘sufficient cause’ within the meaning of section 249(3) of the Act. The ld. CIT(Appeals) did not condone the delay and without condoning the delay dismissed the appeal of the assessee and without going into merits of the case as there was no sufficient cause for condonation of the delay in filing of the appeal as well as negligent attitude on the part of the appellant by mentioning that this case is not fit for condonation of delay within the specified time limit before him. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT.

At the time of hearing, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal without giving opportunities to the assessee simply saying that the assessee has not provided a plausible explanation with supporting documentary evidence for the delay in filing appeal before him. The ld. CIT(Appeals) simply dismissed the appeal of assessee for not filing the appeal before him within the stipulated period of time and without going into the merits of the case. He pleaded that there is no delay in filing of appeal, but it failed to substantiate its claim

On the other hand, it was the submission of the ld. Departmental Representative that the assessee failed to offer any explanation/supporting documents in respect of the grounds of appeal raised by him before the ld. Assessing Officer as well as ld. CIT(Appeals). The assessee also not filed any documentary evidence in support of delay in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and for this reason, ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of assessee ex-parte for not furnishing satisfactory explanation before him within the stipulated period of time. The CIT(Appeals) was of the opinion that the assessee has not been able to show any ‘sufficient cause’ for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed period, within the meaning of section 249(3) of the Act, read with Section 5 of The Limitation Act. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the orders passed by the revenue authorities.

I have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of assessee due to delay in not furnishing the appeal in time before him. I also find that the assessment order has been passed u/s. 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act as the assessee failed to produce any cogent proof or explanation in support of the claim and to substantiate its case. The assessee received the order under appeal on 31st May, 2021, so, according to the assessee, there is no delay in filing of appeal, but failed to substantiate its claim by uploading relevant

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22/06/2026.