Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal with a delay of 63 days, attributing it to lack of proper guidance and communication issues with the CA. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's earlier appeal ex-parte due to non-response to notices.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 63 days, considering the explanation provided in the affidavit. On merits, the Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision, citing principles of natural justice.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and if the ex-parte order of CIT(A) needs to be set aside for a fresh adjudication on merit.
Sections Cited
270A, 271A, 271B, 271AAC(1), 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
per ground of appeal on record.
At the outset of hearing, we found from perusal of record that there is delay of 63 days in filing this appeal before this Tribunal for which, the assessee has filed an application for condonation in the form of affidavit mentioning the fact that the assessee received notices under Section 270A, 271A, 271B and 271AAC(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) on 06/06/2025 from the Verification Unit, Income Tax Department. The notices were received through Income Tax
1. 2 ITA1890/Chny/2025 Atturampalayam Venkatachalam Krishna Kumar Vs ITO Inspector, Tiruchengode ward in the second week of June, 2025. After receiving the notices, the assessee consulted one CA Shri Sathyan Ganesan for professional guidance. He advised me to consult CA T.S. Lakshmivenkataram Salem for professional guidance. The assessee stated that since the distance between the assessee and the engaged CA is around 65 KM so the assessee could not contact the concerned CA immediately. In the last week of June, 2025, the assessee consulted the CA and he informed me that the appellate order was already passed by the ld. CIT(A) on 26/02/2025 by dismissing the appeal of the assessee.
Thereafter, the concerned CA prepared the appeal file and immediately the present appeal on 02/07/2025 before this Tribunal. The assessee stated that the delay is not intentional and deliberate, the same was due to situation beyond his control. He has good case on merit and is likely to succeed, if one more opportunity is provided to the assessee.
On merit of the case, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer has passed assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act on 26/12/2019 by making various additions. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the appeal was dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) by passing ex parte order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee has good case on merit and prayed that one more opportunity may be provided and the matter may be restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for deciding the issue on merit.
On the other hand, the ld. Sr.DR for the revenue on the application of condonation of delay, submitted that the Bench may take appropriate view as per
3 ITA1890/Chny/2025 Atturampalayam Venkatachalam Krishna Kumar Vs ITO law. On merit, the ld. Sr.DR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has given ample opportunities of hearing to the assessee by issuing various notices but the assessee has not responded to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). The assessee was not serious in pursing his appeal before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, the assessee does not deserve any leniency at this stage.
We have considered the rival submissions. On the issue of condonation of delay, we find that the delay was not deliberate and occurred due to lack of proper guidance as mentioned in the affidavit. Thus, we condone the delay of 63 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal and admit the same for hearing.
On merit, we find that the Assessing Officer has passed assessment order under Section 143(3) on 26/12/2019 by making various additions. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing ex parte order on the ground that no response has been made by the appellant to the notices of hearing and also no application for adjournment nor any written submissions have been submitted till the date of disposal of the appeal. No submission or evidence in respect of the additions made has been adduced by the assessee during the appellate proceedings. Before us, the ld. AR submitted that one more opportunity may be provided to the assessee to represent his case on merit before the ld. CIT(A). Thus, considering the principles of natural justice, the matter is restored back to the file of Assessing Officer for deciding the issue afresh by providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the Assessing Officer and file all the relevant documents
4 ITA1890/Chny/2025 Atturampalayam Venkatachalam Krishna Kumar Vs ITO and evidences as required by the Assessing Officer. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only.
In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26/09/2025.