JAFAR ALI ABDULLAH,TRICHY vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), TRICHY

There is a delay of 300 days in filing the appeal by the assessee.

The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the petition/affidavit of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is hereby condoned.

The assessee is an individual, filed his return of income declaring total income of Rs. 5,64,680/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. The A.O passed assessment order ex-parte, assessing total income of Rs.7,86,04,100/- as notices issued remained un-complied. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 59 days. However, the Ld. CIT(A) declined to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal as not maintainable.

At the outset, the Learned Authorized Representative (Ld. A.R.)

1. submitted that the assessment order was passed ex-parte and that the Ld. CIT(A) also not adjudicated the appeal on merits. Therefore, it is prayed that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to substantiate his case before the A.O.

The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, has relied on the orders of lower authorities.

We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), it is observed that there was a delay of 59 days in filing the appeal before him. The assessee had explained that the delay was due to owing to bonafide medical ailments. However, the Ld. CIT(A) did not accept the explanation and dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. Having considered the matter, we are of the opinion that there was sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed time.

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