Facts
The assessee, a primary agricultural cooperative credit society, did not file its income tax return for AY 2012-13. The AO reopened the assessment under Section 147 and made an ex-parte addition of Rs. 24,24,457/- under Section 69A for unexplained cash deposits under Section 144. The CIT(A) rejected the assessee's appeal in limine due to belated filing without considering the reasons for delay, including a withdrawn writ petition and a condonation petition.
Held
The ITAT held that the assessee had shown sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal, which was due to the pendency and subsequent withdrawal of a writ petition to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. Consequently, the ITAT remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) with a direction to admit the appeal and decide it afresh on merits after providing a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Key Issues
The primary issue was whether the CIT(A) was justified in rejecting the assessee's appeal in limine without considering the petition for condonation of delay, which arose from the assessee's initial pursuit of a writ petition.
Sections Cited
144, 147, 69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI JAGADISH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 06.12.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by the Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income-tax Act,1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on 26.11.2019.
:- 2 -:
The assessee is a primary agricultural co-operative credit society and has not filed its return of income. The A.O reopened the assessment as the assessee had made cash deposits amounting to Rs. 24,24,457/-, but has not filed return of income. The A.O in the ex- pate order passed u/s 144 made addition u/s. 69A of the Act of Rs.24,24,457/-. Aggrieved by the said addition, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A) did not admit the appeal on the ground that appeal was filed belatedly, without condonation petition.
The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee submitted that the assessee had filed a writ petition before the Hon’ble Madras High Court on 26.11.2019 against the assessment order, which was subsequently withdrawn on 03.02.2020 in order to avail the statutory appellate remedy. The Ld. A.R further submitted that a petition for condonation of delay along with a copy of the writ petition was filed before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A) did not consider the same and rejected the appeal in limine.
:- 3 -:
The Ld. Departmental Representative (D.R) relied on the orders of the lower authorities.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Upon perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the appeal was rejected solely on the ground of delay in filing, without considering the reasons furnished by the assessee. Before us, the Ld. A.R has explained that the delay was due to the pendency of a writ petition before the Hon’ble High Court, which was later withdrawn to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. We are of the opinion that the assessee has shown sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal, and therefore, the appeal ought to have been admitted.
Accordingly, we remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to admit the appeal. The Ld. CIT(A) shall decide the matter afresh in accordance with law, after providing the assessee with a proper opportunity of being heard to substantiate its case. The assessee is also directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on the date of hearing without fail and furnish all relevant details for fresh consideration. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
:- 4 -:
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.