BANGALORE MALLAIAH MALLIKARJUNAIAH,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), BANGALORE

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Abdul Jaleel, Bangalore Page 2 of 9 Abdul Jaleel, Bangalore Page 3 of 9 3. At the outset, there is a delay of 126 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. Before us, the ld. A.R. of the assessee drew our attention to an affidavit dated 4.7.2025 along with an application or condonation of delay in filing the appeal which are reproduced below for ease of reference and convenience: Abdul Jaleel, Bangalore Page 4 of 9 Abdul Jaleel, Bangalore Page 5 of 9 Abdul Jaleel, Bangalore Page 6 of 9 Abdul Jaleel, Bangalore Page 7 of 9 Abdul Jaleel, Bangalore Page 8 of 9 4. Having heard the ld. Counsel for the assessee and the ld. D.R., it is perceived that the explanation in the condonation application as well as in affidavit is plausible and sufficient cause being shown by the assessee which prevented him from filing the appeal within the specified period and accordingly, we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merit.

1 On going through the order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, we take a note of the fact that the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal on the ground that in spite of giving sufficient opportunities, the assessee did not submit any documents/record nor any submissions. The ld. CIT(A)/NFAC held that the assessee is not interested in pursuing his appeal and further held that the AO has made the addition on merits considering the facts of the case and no infirmity is noticed in the order of AO and accordingly dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

2 Before us both the parties fairly conceded that the assessee could not represent his case before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. This being so, in the interest of justice and fair play and as requested by the ld. A.R. of the assessee, we deem it fit and proper to remit the entire issue in dispute to the file of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to decide afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say, a reasonable opportunity of being heard must be granted to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the proceedings with ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and should not take unnecessary adjournments. We make it clear that in case of further default, the assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.

3 Further, while remitting the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, we also consider it necessary to impose a token cost of Rs.5,000/- to the assessee owing to the negligence shown towards the statutory notices before the first appellate stage. The assessee Abdul Jaleel, Bangalore Page 9 of 9 shall deposit the total cost of Rs.5,000/- in favour of Prime Minister Relief Fund and the receipt thereof shall be furnished before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. With these terms, the appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for de-novo consideration with the above observations.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 5 Guard file