Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(Appeals) due to a delay of 821 days. The assessee claimed the delay was due to a pending rectification application under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning a denial of deduction under Section 80P(2)(d).
Held
The Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the CIT(Appeals) to decide the issue of condonation of delay and, if successful, to adjudicate the appeal on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was sufficiently explained and whether the CIT(Appeals) should have adjudicated the grounds of appeal on merits.
Sections Cited
143(1), 154, 80P(2)(d), 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “J (SMC
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA
आदेश / ORDER
PER ARUN KHODPIA, AM:
The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, dated 30.04.2025 for the assessment year 2019-20 as per the following grounds of appeal:
“I. The order dated 30/04/2025 bearing No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1075894863[I] Passed under section 250 of Income Tax Act.1961 by the Hon'ble CIT[Appeal], ADDL/JCIT (A)-7, DELHI is unreasonable, arbitrary, against the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 and therefore liable to be quashed.
On the facts and in circumstance of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT [Appeal] ADDL/JC1T (A)-7, Delhi has erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal even though the sufficient reason for the said delay was furnished by the Appellant. 3 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Honorable CIT [Appeal) ADDUJCIT (A) -7 Delhi has erred in not adjudicating the Grounds of Appeal
raised by the Appellant for denying the deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act,1961.
4. The appellant craves leave to add to, amend or alter the above grounds as may be deemed necessary.”
2. At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the delay of 821 days in filing of appeal before the first appellate authority was occasioned, accordingly the appeal of the assessee was dismissed on account of delay itself. He further submitted that the reason for delay could not be furnished by the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A). Before us, he explained that the delay was occurred because after disallowance/additions as per intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’), wherein the claim of assessee u/s 80P(2)(d) was denied, in recourse, the assessee chooses to use the remedy available u/s. 154 of the Act. Accordingly, an application for rectification was filed by the assessee. However, the rectification as sought by the assessee u/s. 154 of the Act was not disposed off by the department, whereas, the assessee was under Bonafide impression that the disallowance made would be rectified u/s. 154 of the Act. In such circumstances, on account of pendency of assessee’s application u/s 154, the appeal was not filed by the assessee in time and consequently such delay of 821 days was occasioned. It was the submission that assessee had sufficient cause to explain the delay, therefore one more opportunity to respond may be provided.
The Ld. Sr. DR objected to the aforesaid contention raised by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, as no evidence regarding aforesaid submissions qua filing of application u/s.154 of the Act has been furnished by the assessee.
After considering the rival contentions of the parties herein, we find that in the present case, the assessee, as stated at bar by the Ld Counsel of the assessee, was in the process for rectification of mistake apparent on record u/s. 154 of the Act, to which no effect was given by the department till the filing of the appeal. If such averment can be corroborated by the assessee, it would be a Bonafide reasons in delayed filing the appeal before the first appellate authority. The counsel of assessee therefore directed to furnish the copy of application U/s 154. In due course, Ld AR submitted the copy of acknowledgment for rectification application u/s 154 dated 07.10.2020 (ref: 448147210070820) and an order of rectification was also passed by the CPC, however, such order was not furnished by the assessee. In view of such circumstances, it would be necessary verify from records that when the rectification order was passed, so as to decide the reasonable in the reasons for delay in filing of appeal. Copy of online submission furnished by the assessee before ld. CIT(A) dated 29.04.2024 vide acknowledgment no. 191663861290424 is also submitted before us.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, following the principle of natural justice, it would be appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC for disposing the appeal after hearing the assessee on the issue of condonation of delay and if succeed, on merits of the case.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd August, 2025.