GAUTHAM SOCIAL CULTURAL AND EDUCATION SOCIETY,CHAMARAJANAGARA vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD, MYSURU

PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

3. At the outset, the ld. A.R. of the assessee vehemently submitted that ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee by not condoning the delay of 121 days in filing the appeal. Further ld. A.R. of the assessee submitted that the notices issued calling for various details as well as the show cause notice could not be addressed as these notices were sent to the e-mail of the Secretary who is over 70 years of age and is not a computer Gautham Social Cultural and Education Society, Chamarajanagara Page 3 of 4 literate. Further, the Secretary was not in office consistently as his wife was dealing with severe health issues. Consequently, the assessee was unaware of the receipt of these notices. The assessee only became aware of the assessment order when they received physical copies of the penalty notices from the department indicating that the assessment order had already been passed.

4. Having heard the ld. Counsel for the assessee and ld. D.R., it is perceived that the explanation offered in the condonation application is plausible and sufficient cause being shown by the assessee which prevented them from filing the appeal within the prescribed period before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and accordingly we are inclined to condone the delay of 121 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC.

5. Now having condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, we are remitting the entire issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to decide on the merit of the case in accordance with law. Needless to say, a reasonable opportunity of being heard must be granted to the assessee.

Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore.