Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the NFAC, Delhi, with a delay of 238 days. The assessee cited a partner's illness as the reason for the delay and supported this with an affidavit and medical records. The assessee had also opted not to receive communications via email, yet notices were sent by email.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 238 days, finding reasonable cause. The Tribunal also noted that the CIT(A)'s order was non-speaking and lacked reasons, which is contrary to Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case back for a fresh decision.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal is condonable and whether the CIT(A)'s order was passed without adhering to the principles of natural justice and statutory requirements.
Sections Cited
250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, BANGALORE
Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY
PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi vide order dated 30/03/2024 in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/ S/250/2023-24/1063685455(1) for the assessment year 2017-18.
At the outset, we notice that there is a delay of 238 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee before us. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay, supported by an affidavit and medical records. It was submitted that the partner who was looking after the tax matters was not keeping well and, therefore, the appeal could not be filed within the stipulated time. In view of these facts, the learned AR prayed that the delay be condoned and the appeal be decided on merits.
On the other hand, the learned DR opposed condonation and submitted that the assessee is a partnership firm. In the event of illness of one partner, the other partners could have pursued the matter so as to avoid delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal.
We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials on record. Considering the reasons stated in the condonation petition, duly supported by affidavit and medical records, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed time. Accordingly, the delay of 238 days is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing on merits.
4.1 Moving further, we note that in Form 35 the assessee had clearly opted not to receive communication through e-mail. However, the records show that the notices intimating the date of hearing were in fact sent to the assessee by e-mail. As such, there is merit in the contention that the assessee was not effectively served the notice intimating the date of hearing.
4.2 In addition, we also note that the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is non-speaking and without assigning any reasons. This is contrary to the mandate of section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, . which requires the CIT(A) to state clearly the points for determination, the decision thereon, and the reasons for such decision.
4.3 In view of the above, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order to the file of the learned CIT(A) with a direction to decide the issue afresh by passing a speaking order in accordance with law. It is needless to mention that the assessee shall be given fair opportunity of being heard and shall also ensure necessary compliance and avoid unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in court on 3rd day of November, 2025