AWLA INFRA,FEROZEPUR vs. ASSITANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, FEROZEPUR

The assessee has filed an application for an adjournment on the date of hearing which is rejected after considering the grounds of appeal and the materials on record, we proceed to dispose off the case after hearing the ld. D.R.

Condonation of delay: This appeal is filed belatedly by 392 (three hundred ninety-two) days, and the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay explained the reasons that the appeal has been filed against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) dated 18.10.2023 but in fact, no such order has been passed by the ld. CIT(A). The order passed by the ld. first appellate authority was in respect of the penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act and was not against the quantum assessment dated 29.12.2019 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act. This has resulted in a confusion with the assessee and since there was no appellate order available in respect of quantum, no appeal was filed. Grievance was filed in portal pointing out the inadvertent mistake but the same could not be rectified because the system has already closed the portal as “unable to respond”. 4. Subsequently, on realizing the mistake committed by the ld. first appellate authority, this appeal is being filed before the Tribunal against technically incorrect order passed by the ld. CIT(A) which was belated by 392 days. As such, he prayed for condonation of delay and for admission of the appeal to be heard on merits. 5. The ld. DR has no objection.

Considering the unusual facts of the case on the explanations submitted by the assessee, we condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 7. Brief facts of the case are that the order has been passed u/s 143(3) by the Assessing Officer dated 29.12.2019, assessment being completed on a total income of Rs. 8.42 lacs against the returned income as nil. 8. The matter carried in appeal before the ld. first appellate authority has been dismissed on a wrong assumption of facts that the assessee has opted for settlement of dispute under the ‘Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme’, 2020 vide application dated 22.06.2020. As a result, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for statistical purposes holding the same to be withdrawn. However, it has been subsequently found that the assessee has filed for Vivad Se Vishwas against the penalty order dated 17.10.2019 passed u/s 271(1)(b) of the act and has not opted against the appeal pending before the ld. first appellate authority in respect of quantum assessment u/s 143(3) which was still pending. 9. Due to mistaken assumption of fact, the appeal filed against the order dated 29.12.2019 passed u/s 143(3) has been wrongly dismissed by the ld. first appellate authority without any adjudication on merits, even though written submissions are filed by the assessee and the same are on record.

The assessee now prays for setting aside the first appeal order (inadvertently passed) and prays for adjudication of the appeal filed on 18th January, 2020, against the quantum order u/s 143(3), dated 29/12/2019, still pending before the Ld. first appellate authority 11. We have heard the ld. AR and also considered the materials on record and the ld. DR also admits the mistake that has been inadvertently committed by the ld. first appellate authority and as such, the matter is remanded back to the files of the ld. CIT(A) for an adjudication on the grounds contained in Form No. 35 in respect of the appeal dated 18/01/2020 which is pending before the ld. first appellate authority against the quantum assessment passed u/s 143(3) dated 29/12/2019. 12. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.