4G COMMUNICATIONS,PONDICHERRY vs. ITO, WARD-5., PONDICHERRY

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.

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.