VIVEKRAMESHCHANDRA RATHOD ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-41(4)(4), MUMBAI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“SMC” BENCH MUMBAI
BEFORE HON’BLE BR BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Vivek Ramesh Chandra
Rathod
503, Ashoka Super Market,
SV Road, Goregoan (W)
Mumbai.
Vs.
ITO – 41(4)(4)
Room No. 607, Kautilya
Bhawan, BKC, Bandra
East, Mumbai –
400051. PAN/GIR No. AZEPR0944J
(Applicant)
(Respondent)
Assessee by Shri Devendra Jain
Revenue by Smt. Usha Gaikwad, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing
06.03.2025
Date of Pronouncement
10.03.2025
आदेश / ORDER
PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 27.09.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National
Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi / CIT(A), for the A.Y 2017-
18. 2. At the very outset, we noticed that there is a delay in filing the appeal before us, and in this regard assessee has 2
Vivek Ramesh Chandra Rathod, Mumbai filed application for seeking condonation of delay, supported by an affidavit has been filed by the assessee.
On the other hand Ld. DR contested the said application and relied upon the orders passed by the revenue authorities.
After having heard the counsels for both the parties on this application and perusal of the record shows that because of inadvertent mistake, the appeal could not be filed within time. Therefore, considering the factual position in this case and also keeping in view, the principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Land Acquisition Collector Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., [1987] AIR 1353 (SC) we condone the delay in filing the present appeal before us and consequently appeal is admitted to be heard on merits.
After having heard the counsels on the merits of the appeal, we found from the record that assessee was ex- parte before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee has explained the same reasons for not appearing before Ld. CIT(A) as mentioned in the accompanying application for seeking condonation of delay. Therefore we are of the view that ends of justice would be met In case the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh decision on merits
3
Vivek Ramesh Chandra Rathod, Mumbai 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, 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 10.03.2025. (BR BASKARAN) (SANDEEP GOSAIN)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai, Dated 10/03/2025
KRK, PS
4
Vivek Ramesh Chandra Rathod, Mumbai
आदेश की ितिलिप अेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. थ / The Respondent.
3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु / The CIT(A)
4. आयकर आयु(अपील) / Concerned CIT
5. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6. गाड फाईल / Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
सािपत ित ////
उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst.