Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) in limine due to a delay of 170 days in filing the appeal, without adjudicating on merits. The assessee had stated in Form 35 that the condonation application would be submitted later, but omitted to provide the reasons for the delay. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without issuing a defect notice or affording an opportunity for explanation.
Held
The Tribunal held that the dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) without issuing a defect notice and providing an opportunity to the assessee violates the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the matter needs to be restored back to the CIT(A) for a proper condonation application and decision on merits if the delay is condoned.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal in limine without issuing a defect notice and providing an opportunity to explain the delay, thus violating principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KAND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA
आदेश /O R D E R
PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT:
This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 14.01.2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2017-18.
2. At the very outset, we notice that CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without adjudicating on merits. The CIT(A) held that there is a delay of 170 days in filing the appeal before him and the assessee has not submitted the reasons for delay. The Ld.AR submitted that in Form 35, the assessee has stated there is delay in filing the appeal and could not present the condonation application at the time of filing the appeal before the CIT(A). Therefore, the assessee has submitted that the grounds for condonation of delay ‘will be submitted later’. However, the assessee had omitted to furnish the reason for delay. The CIT(A) without giving notice, had rejected the appeal in limine. It was submitted by the ld.AR that before dismissing the appeal in limine on account of delay in filing the appeal, assessee ought to have been provided with defect notice stating that condonation petition has not filed before the First Appellate Authority.
The ld.DR was duly heard.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The appeal filed by the assessee has been dismissed by the CIT(A) in limine without condoning the delay of 170 days. Admittedly, the assessee had not filed the condonation petition. The CIT(A) without issuing defect notice to the assessee had dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The principle of natural justice requires that notice should be issued to the assessee seeking its explanation why the delay in filing the appeal before him cannot be condoned. In the instant case, such notice was never issued by the CIT(A). In the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that the matter needs to be restored back to the files of the CIT(A). Accordingly, we restore the matter to the files of the CIT(A) so that a proper condonation application if required can be filed by the assessee and on receipt of the same, the CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee before a decision is taken on the condonation application. If the CIT(A) is satisfied with the reasons furnished by the assessee for belated filing of the appeal, needless to state, the CIT(A) shall decide the issue on merits. It is ordered accordingly. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd June, 2025 at Chennai.