Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 2 days. The assessee claimed the delay was bonafide and due to not being aware of the limitation period, and submitted an affidavit for condonation of delay. The assessee's representative argued that no notice of hearing or defects were notified by the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 2-day delay in filing the appeal after finding the reasons to be bonafide. The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) and directed it to consider the condonation petition and decide the appeal on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the condonation of delay and deciding on merits after affording reasonable opportunity.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunatha
Year: 2017-18 4G Communications, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 30, 1st Floor, 1st Cross, West Sathiya Ward 5, Nagar, Saram, Puducherry 605 013. Pondicherry. [PAN:AABFZ5235D] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri N. Rajakumar, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 25.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 28.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06.03.2025 passed by the Addl./JCIT(A)-10, Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18.
We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 2 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication.
The assessee raised 8 grounds of appeal amongst which, the only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in dismissing the appeal exparte of the assessee in the facts and circumstances of the case.
4. At the outset, we note that the ld. AR Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate submits that no notice of hearing or defects notified by the ld. CIT(A) as the assessee was not aware of the limitation and passed exparte order without adjudicating on merits of the case. He prayed that suitable direction may be issued to consider the condonation petition and decide the issue on merits by affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
The ld. DR Shri N. Rajakumar, Addl. CIT(A) relied on the order passed by the ld. CIT(A).
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. On perusal of Col. 14 of Form 35, we note that the assessee has mentioned “No” as whether there is delay in filing appeal and thus, it is clear that the assessee was not aware of the limitation. On perusal of the impugned order, we note that no notice of hearing/defects notified by the ld. CIT(A) to the assessee before completing the first appellate order. Under the above facts and circumstances, we set aside the impugned order and direct the ld. CIT(A) to consider the application for condoning the delay and condone the delay of 9 days, if any, in filing the appeal by the assessee and adjudicate the issue on merits by affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to file condonation petition before the ld. CIT(A). Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 28th August, 2025 at Chennai.