SHARADAPRASAD DUBARIRAM YADAV,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

We have heard the parties and perused the materials on record. The basic grievance of the assessee is dismissal of its appeal in limine by learned first appellate authority without condoning delay.

Briefly stated, the assessee is a resident individual and derives income from salary through his employment with Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. For the assessment year under dispute, the assessee had filed his return of income in regular course. A survey u/s. 133A of the Act was conducted in case of Shri Vijay Sawant, a survey, assessment in case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act and ultimately, an order of assessment was passed on 04.05.2023, adding an amount of Rs.96,120/- on account of suppression of income. Contesting the said addition, the assessee filed an appeal before learned first appellate authority. It appears, there was delay of 10 days in filing the appeal before learned first appellate authority. Explaining, the cause of delay, the assessee had filed an Affidavit before learned first appellate authority, stating that due to his illness, the appeal could not be filed in time. In support, copy of medical certificate was also furnished. However, disbelieving the contention of the assessee, learned first appellate authority dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground of delay, while observing that the assessee failed to establish sufficient cause for delay.

Having considered rival submissions, we are of the view, instead of dismissing assessee’s appeal in limine without condoning the delay, learned first appellate authority should have decided the appeal on merits. As could be seen from the facts on record, the delay in filing the appeal was not inordinate, but of only 10 days.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.