Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessees filed appeals challenging orders of the Ld. CIT(A). The appeals were filed belatedly by 292 days due to issues with their previous Chartered Accountant. The assessees appointed a new CA who advised them to file appeals with a condonation petition.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, finding reasonable cause. The Tribunal noted that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals without adjudicating on merits and thus restored the issues to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeals before the ITAT should be condoned and whether the appeals should be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI “SMC” BENCH : MUMBAI
Before: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN
ORDER PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M : Both the assessees have filed these appeals challenging the orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟] in their respective hands and they relate to AY. 2017-18.
Both the appeals are barred by limitation of 292 days. Both the assessees have filed affidavits, explaining the delay and it is stated therein that erstwhile Chartered Accountant did not respond to the notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A) and also did not communicate the order passed by him in their hands. It is further submitted that the assessees have appointed a new Chartered Accountant and he advised both the assessees to file appeals before the ITAT challenging the orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A). On his advice, these appeals were filed along with condonation petition. Accordingly, it is prayed that the delay in filing these appeals before the ITAT be condoned.
We heard the Ld.DR on this preliminary issue in respect of both the appeals. Having regard to the submissions made by the assessees in their affidavits, we are of the view that there was reasonable cause for them in filing these appeals belatedly before the ITAT. Accordingly we condone the delay and admit both the appeals for hearing.
We heard the parties and perused the record.We notice that the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals on the reasoning that the assessees did not pursue their appeals. We notice that the Ld.CIT(A) has also not adjudicated the appeals on merits. Accordingly, we are of the view that,interest of natural justice, both the assessees may be provided with one more opportunity to present their cases properly before the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) in their respective hands and restore all the issues to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudicating them on merits, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessees. We also direct the assessees to fully co-operate with the Ld.CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the issues in both the appeals.
In the result, both the appealsaretreated as allowed.