Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) beyond the prescribed time limit, and the CIT(A) dismissed it as not maintainable. The delay occurred due to the order being lost sight of within the appellant's administrative dispatch department.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of approximately three months, holding that there was a reasonable cause for the delay. Since the CIT(A) had not decided the issue on merits, the matter was restored back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was to be condoned, and whether the matter should be restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
201(1), 201(1A), 249(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘I’ BENCH
आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 29/10/2024 passed by NFAC / CIT(A) in relation to the order passed u/s.201(1) / 201(1A) of the Act for the A.Y.2016-17.
In the grounds of appeal assessee is aggrieved by the action of the ld. CIT(A) in not condoning the delay in filing of the appeal and confirming the action of the ld. AO for treating the assessee as “assessee in default” under the provisions of
1. 3. Before us ld. Counsel submitted that assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay and ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal as not maintainable considering that appeal is not filed in conformity with the provisions of Section 249(2) and there is no sufficient cause for condonation of delay in appeal.
Before us it has been stated that delay in filing of appeal mainly occurred on account of the following facts:-
1. The order dated 24 June 2019 passed by the assessing officer under section 201(1A) for the captioned assessment year was received on 27 June 2019 (copy of proof of receipt enclosed as Annexure A), however the same has been inadvertently lost sight by the appellant for the reason that there was a delay at the administrative dispatch department of the appellant who forwards the courier to the concerned department. 2 It was only later on that the relevant personnel handling tax matters for the appellant after receipt of the courier on 28 August 2019 (copy of email sent to dispatch team requesting for date of receipt enclosed as Annexure B) noticed that no action has been taken against the said order and forwarded the order to the appellant's tax consultant on 5 September 2019 to know the appropriate course of action 3. During the course of discussion with the tax consultant it was advised that the appeal shall be filed against the said order accordingly, the appeal was filed on 25 September 2019 As the order is dated 24 June 2019 (received on 27 June 2019), accordingly the appeal was required to be filed within Regus Suburb Centres Pvt. Ltd. 30 days Le, by 27 July 2019, however it was belatedly filed an appeal on 25 September 2019.
Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances that there was a reasonable cause in filing of appeal before the ld. First Appellate Authority and delay is only of three months, therefore, in the interest of justice, the delay is condoned. It is also seen that ld. CIT(A) has not decided the issue on merits, therefore, in the interest of justice matter is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the case on merits after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 18th February, 2025.