RAMNARESH BOHARE,SHEOPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1), GWALIOR

The appeals in ITA Nos. 222 and 223/AGR/2026 for AY 2018-19, arise out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 24.03.2025 and 28.03.2025 respectively against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 22.03.2023 and 25.08.2023 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward-1(1)(3), Agra (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).

At the outset, I find there is delay in filing of appeal by the assessee before this Tribunal by 288 days. Considering the reasons adduced in the condonation petition, I hold that assessee was prevented from sufficient cause in not filing the appeal in time. In the interest of substantial justice, I am inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication.

In appeal against the quantum proceedings, the ld CIT(A) in page 1 of his order says that the appeal is in time, but in page 3 of his order he says that the appeal is belated by 1 year and 11 months and accordingly proceeds to dismiss the appeal. Thereafter, the ld CIT(A) having decided to dismiss the appeal on the ground of delay, proceeds to adjudicate the issue on merits by dismissing all the grounds of the assessee on merits. Once, the appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay, the appeal itself is not maintainable. Then, the ld CIT(A) ought not to have adjudicated the appeal on merits, having dismissed the appeal on the ground of delay. I find that the assessment order in quantum proceedings was framed as on 22.03.2023 and the appeal before the ld CIT(A) was filed on 10.4.23, which is within the period of 30 days. Hence, there is no delay in filing of appeal by the assessee before the ld CIT(A). Hence, I deem it fit and appropriate to restore this quantum appeal to the file of the ld CIT(A) for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the ld CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of this appeal and by not taking unwarranted adjournments, except due to exceptional or bonafide circumstances. The ld CIT(A) is directed to dispose of this appeal uninfluenced by earlier decision taken in this appeal after due appreciation of the submissions of the assessee. With these observations, the appeal in ITA No. 222/AGR/2026 is allowed for statistical purposes.

At the outset, I find there is delay in filing of appeal by the assessee before this Tribunal by 288 days. Considering the reasons adduced in the condonation petition, I hold that assessee was prevented from sufficient cause in not filing the appeal in time. In the interest of substantial justice, I

The appeal in ITA No. 223/AGR/2026, relate to penalty proceeding u/s 271B of the Act. Since the quantum appeal is restored to the file of the ld CIT(A), wherein the turnover is to be determined and the outcome of such appeal would have a bearing on this issue also, I deem it fit and appropriate to restore this appeal to the file of the ld CIT(A) for de novo adjudication in accordance with law.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes.