MEPANI MARINE SERVICES,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO WARD - 2(1), JAMNAGAR

We, first take up ITA No. 691/RJT/2026 as the lead case and our findings therein shall apply mutatis mutandis to the other connected appeals.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed the return of income for Assessment Year 2019–20. Proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated. However, the assessee did not appear in response to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer. Consequently, the assessment came to be completed in the hands of the assessee by making certain addition.

Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). However, there was substantial delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. CIT(A), without adjudicating the issue on merits, dismissed the appeal solely on account of delay of 428 days in filing the same.

Still aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) assessee is in appeal before this tribunal. At the time of hearing before us, the learned AR submitted that one of the partners who was looking after the affairs of the business was suffering from illness and therefore could not properly pursue the matter before the authorities below. It was further submitted that even the consultant handling the matter could not properly

On the other hand, the learned DR supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the assessee had failed to substantiate the reasons for condonation of delay and such plea cannot be entertained at this stage. Accordingly, the DR supported the decision of the lower authorities.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the contention of the assessee is that due to illness of one of the partners and lack of proper representation by the consultant, the matter could not be effectively pursued, resulting in an ex parte order against the assessee and consequent delay in filing the appeal. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of substantial justice, we are inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- in each appeal, which shall be deposited by the assessee in the Prime Minister Relief Fund and proof of such deposit shall be furnished before the CIT(A).Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Since ITA No. 692/Rjt/2026 and ITA No. 693/Rjt/2026 are interconnected with ITA No. 691/Rjt/2026, these matters are also restored to the file of the CIT(A) with similar directions for fresh adjudication.

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