AWLA INFRA,FEROZEPUR vs. ASSITANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, FEROZEPUR
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for statistical purposes on a mistaken assumption that the assessee had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme for the quantum appeal, when in fact the scheme was applied only for a penalty order. This resulted in a delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay due to the unusual facts and the admitted mistake by the revenue. The Tribunal found that the appeal before the CIT(A) was wrongly dismissed without adjudication on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) wrongly dismissed the appeal for statistical purposes due to a mistaken assumption regarding the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme, and if the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal should be condoned.
Sections Cited
143(3), 250, 271(1)(b)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Addl./JCIT (A)- 13, Mumbai dated 18.10.2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (henceforth the Act) which has emanated from the order of the DCIT, Ferozepur dated 29.12.2019
passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2 I.T.A. No. 53/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 2. 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”.
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.
The ld. DR has no objection.
3 I.T.A. No. 53/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 6. 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.
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.
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.
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.
4 I.T.A. No. 53/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 10. 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
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.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate
Tribunal) Rules, 1963 as on 12.03.2026
Sd/- Sd/- (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) (Udayan Dasgupta) Accountant Member Judicial Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T True Copy By Order
