LAXMI ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES (BHOPAL) PRIVATE LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. ITO-5(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in ITANo.827/Ind/2025:

Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay for 963 days. The assessment order passed on 15.04.2021 which was received by the assessee on 17.06.2021. The appeal could have been filed up to 17.07.2021. However, the appeal has been filed on 04.12.2023 in a delay of 963 days. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that period of covid-19 in terms of Supreme Court order in Cour on its Own Motion Civil Application No.3 of 2020, the period from 15.03.2020 to 30.05.2022 shall be ignored. After ignoring the said period the delay remains of 553 days. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the delay in filing the present appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) has occurred due to bona fide and reasonable circumstances beyond the control of the assessee because the order of the AO was contested before the Hon’ble M.P. High Court through a writ petition no.15294 of 2021 which was decided on vide order dated 28.11.2023 and thereafter in view of the observation of the Hon’ble High Court the assessee had filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) without any further delay. Thus he requested to condone the delay occurred before the Ld. CIT(A).

On the other hand, ld. CIT-DR defended the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the ground that the assessee is required to be vigilant and stated that the assessee has not filed application for condonation of delay with CIT(A). The CIT-DR has also strongly objected that after six years the assessee seeking the matter to restore before the Ld. AO. 5. We have considered rival submissions and carefully perused the relevant material on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex parte order dismissing the appeal in limine and barred by limitation before the Ld. CIT(A). Before us an affidavit was filed on behalf of the assessee wherein it has been claimed that the period from 15.03.2020 to 30.05.2022 of covid-19 in terms of Supreme Court order in Cour on its Own Motion Civil Application No.3 of 2020, shall be ignored. After ignoring the said period the delay remains of 553 days. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the delay in filing the present appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) has occurred due to bona fide and reasonable circumstances beyond the control of the assessee which is evident from the fact that due to advise of the counsel, the order of the AO was contested before the Hon’ble M.P. High Court by the assessee through a writ petition no.15294 of 2021, because the assessment order had resulted in a huge and unsustainable demand of Rs.13,15,16,590/-. Thus, the assessee acting under such legal advise and under a bona fide belief did not prefer an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) at that stage but preferred writ as narrated above it was the reason for the delay. Ultimately the Hon’ble High Court decided the write petition vide order dated 28.11.2023 and thereafter in view of the observation of the Hon’ble High Court the assessee had filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) without any further delay. 6. On consideration of above, we are of the view that the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was neither intentional nor deliberate but had occurred due to the bona fide prosecution of remedy before the Hon’ble High Court under a genuine belief. Therefore there was no mala fide intention in filing the appeal belatedly. Our view is supported by the ratio laid down in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Ors vs. Mst. Matiji & Ors (1987) 2 SCC 107 . Thus the assessee has explained the reasons for delay before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to pass the order on the merit afresh because the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assessee on merits but dismissed the same in limine for non-prosecution which is contrary to the provision of section 250(6) of the Act. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice we set aside the impugned order and Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter to the record of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the appeal on merits after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in ITANo.826/Ind/2025:

Since we have already set aside the assessee’s quantum-

We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on the

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are