SWISS FREIGHT (INDIA) PVT.LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 11( 2) (4) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the separate orders of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 28.03.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in facts and in law in not appreciating the fact that loan taken of Rs.3,29,59,927/- were taken from parties by account payee cheque and details of the same we submitted before Assessing Officer. The CIT (A) confirm the Order of Assessing Officer without appreciating the fact that income tax return and bank statement was filed during the course of assessment proceeding. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also in law, It is true that the assessee did not respond before lower authority due to circumstances beyond control. i) The appellant could not take step for follow up with consultant due to his accountant family emergency has her husband was having heart related issues from the month of March 2025 who passed away on 12th September 2025 at the age of 34 years. Due to family emergency she was not attending Office

Swiss Freight (India) Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 7269/Mum/2025 (AY: 2015-16) regularly and therefore could not coordinate with consultant for filing appeal within time before Hon'ble ITAT. ii) The appellant was serious in pursuing the matter therefore file appeal to CIT(A). iii) The consultant could not attend hearing before CIT (A) as appellant accountant had not inform consultant due to his family issue and therefore could not take step to file submission before CIT(Appeal). Due to aforesaid reasons beyond the control, there is gross violation of principal of natural justice and opportunity should be given to represent the case. 2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee fairly submits that there is a delay of 164 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The impugned order was passed by the learned CIT(A) on 28.03.2025. However, the present appeal was filed before the Tribunal only on 11.11.2025. The delay in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate. The accountant of the assessee namely Mrs. Chaitali Rakesh Chavan, who was working as accountant of assessee and also taking care of tax matters, including tax appeals, was not attending her office. She was not attending her office from March 2025 due to a serious heart-related issue with her husband. Her husband suffered a severe heart-related problem and ultimately died on 12.09.2025. Copy of the death certificate of Rakesh Chavan, husband of the accountant of the assessee, is placed on record. The accountant resumed office in the month of October 2025 and, after completing all formalities, took steps for filing the present appeal in November 2025. The delay is neither

Swiss Freight (India) Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 7269/Mum/2025 (AY: 2015-16) intentional nor deliberate but due to the reasons explained hereinabove. The assessee has also filed an affidavit of Mr. Furquan Mohammed Khan, one of the directors of the assessee company, in support of the application for condonation of delay. The learned AR of the assessee submits that the assessee has a good case on merits and is likely to succeed if his case is considered on merits. The AO has made an addition under section 68 by not accepting the genuine loan transaction of Rs. 3.29 crore. The assessee has placed on record sufficient evidence to discharge its onus of proving the identity, creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the transaction. At the time of hearing, the learned AR of the assessee submits that he is ready to bear some cost if the delay is condoned and the matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A). 3. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. DR) for the Revenue submits that even before the learned CIT(A), the assessee has not made any compliance. The order of the learned CIT(A) is ex parte. Even, there was no proper compliance before the AO. The learned Senior DR for the Revenue submits that the assessee is habitual in not making timely compliance. The delay may not be condoned and the appeal may be dismissed as unadmitted. In alternative submissions, the ld Sr DR for the revenue submits that in case the bench considered it appropriate to condone the delay, the assessee may be burdened with heavy cost for allowing opportunity before lower authorities.

Swiss Freight (India) Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 7269/Mum/2025 (AY: 2015-16) 4. In short rejoinder submission, the learned AR of the assessee submits that the assessee has filed relevant evidence to substantiate the loan transaction and he undertakes to be more vigilant in future in making timely compliance. At least, one more opportunity may be allowed to contest the proceedings before the learned CIT(A). 5. We have heard the submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of the lower authorities carefully. Firstly, we are considering the plea of condonation of delay by the assessee. Considering the overall facts as explained before us and the peculiar facts of the case, and the fact that the husband of the accountant of the assessee has died, copy of the death certificate being available on record, we find that the delay in filing the appeal is not intentional. Hence, the same is condoned. 6. We find that before the AO the assessee has not made proper compliance to prove the identity and creditworthy of lender and genuineness of loan transaction to the satisfaction of AO. The ld CIT(A) confirmed the action of AO by holding that the assessee was allowed eight opportunity to file its submissions. Thus, considering the peculiar facts of the case that before the lower authorities the assessee has not made sufficient compliance and now, the ld AR of the assessee undertook to be more vigilant in making timely compliance before lower authorities, the matter is restored back to the file of the learned CIT(A) to adjudicate all the grounds of appeal on merits, but subject to payment of cost of Rs. 25,000/- to be deposited with the Miscellaneous account of Income tax department. With the aforesaid 4

Swiss Freight (India) Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 7269/Mum/2025 (AY: 2015-16) observation, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order was pronounced in the open Court on 23/09/2026. /- /- Sd/- /- Sd/- Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT PAWAN SINGH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 23/09/2026 Biswajit Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Mumbai; and (5) Guard file. By Order

Assistant Registrar ITAT, Mumbai