SHEETAL NILESH MHATRE,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTER, DELHI, MUMBAI

The delay in filing the appeal occurred due to a lack of proper communication and mismanagement by my tax consultant. Although he filed the original appeal against the assessment order dated 08/09/2021 on 09/10/2021, he mistakenly refiled another appeal for the same matter on 19/06/2022. On 08/09/2022, he informed me of an order passed but indicated it pertained only to the mistakenly filed appeal, leading me to believe that the original appeal was still pending adjudication. It was only upon my recent inquiry that I discovered an order for the original appeal had also been passed on 08/09/2022 by NFAC, Delhi. This critical information was not communicated to me earlier, resulting in my unawareness of the timelines and causing the delay in filing the subsequent appeal.

I came to know that order against the first appeal was also passed on 08/09/2022. Immediately, I approach another Chartered Accountant who suggested me to file the appeal before the Hon'ble CIT- Appeal against the order of NFAC, Delhi. Thereafter and accordingly, I have filed the without any further delay.

On the other hand, Ld. DR contested the contentions raised by the assessee for seeking condonation of delay.

After having heard the counsel for both the parties on the request for seeking condonation of delay, I found that the assessee has successfully demonstrated that she had “sufficient cause” for not presenting the appeal within the stipulated period, therefore considering the factual position in this case and also keeping in view the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Land Acquisition Collector Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors.,

From the records, I noticed that assessee was ex- party before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee has explained the same reasons for not appearing before Ld. CIT(A) as mentioned in the affidavit accompanying the appeal for seeking condonation of delay. Therefore, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be met, in case the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication on merits after providing fair opportunity of hearing to both the parties, the assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings.

Before parting, I 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.

उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst.