Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay of 360 days, as the assessee could not appear. The assessee claimed the assessment order was not properly served and they came to know of it late.
Held
The Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding the appeal afresh on merits, providing one more opportunity to the assessee to represent their case.
Key Issues
Whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and grant an opportunity for a fresh hearing on merits.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH MUMBAI
Mamta Pathak Vs. ITO, Ward 1(2) 6th Floor, Ashar IT Park, 404, 4th Floor, Shivam Wagale Estate, Thane Apt, 400604 Mohanji Sunderji Rd No. 9 Raghunath Nagar, Thane 400604 PAN/GIR No. ALCPP3684Q (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Tanmay Phadke Revenue by Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 20.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 01.09.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:
1. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 07.03.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre / CIT(A), Mumbai for the assessment year 2012- 13.
At the very outset, we noticed that the appeal filed by the assessee before Ld. CIT(A) was delayed by 360 days. Since the assessee could not appear before Ld. CIT(A), therefore the appeal was dismissed by not condoning the delay.
Ld. AR submitted that since the order of assessment was not served on the assessee and she came to know only on 27/01/2023. Therefore, the same be considered as the date of receipt of the order for the purpose of computation of limitaiotn. However, in this regard the assessee could not submit details or explanation, as to how there was delay in service of assessment order, which was passed in ITBA.
4. Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee we are of the view that since the assessee could not put effective representation before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore one more opportunity be given to the assessee to represent his case before Ld. CIT(A). Hence, considering the overall circumstances of the present case, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal afresh on merits by providing one more opportunity to the assessee. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings.
Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 01.09.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 01/09/2025 KRK, PS आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. ��थ� / The Respondent. 2. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / The CIT(A) 3. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / Concerned CIT 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु�बई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�ािपत �ित //True Copy//
उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु�बई मु�बई / ITAT, Mumbai मु�बई मु�बई