Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal after a delay of 96 days, which was dismissed in limine by the CIT(A). The assessment was framed u/s.143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2012-13.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) considering the Covid-19 pandemic. The impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for de novo hearing on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned, and if the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal on merits.
Sections Cited
143(3), 147
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI
(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2012-2013) Rajendran Vadugapatti Chendhil, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 4/324, Ram Nagar PO, Vallipuratham, Ward 1(1) Palayam, Vallipurathanpalayam PO Erode Erode 638 112. [PAN: AIEPC 7880N] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr. Senthil Kumar, Advocate (Virtual) (Erode) ��यथ� क� ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. V. Aswathy, JCIT. सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.03.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)
This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1071014986(1) dated 09.12.2024. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Erode for the assessment year 2012-13 u/s.143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), vide order dated 26.12.2019.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the appeal was instituted on 09.05.2020 against the assessment order dated 26.12.2019 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act by the Assessing Officer (in short 'the AO') for the Assessment Year 2012- 13. The assessee further challenged the order of assessment passed 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act before the ld.CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine on the ground of delay of 96 days. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us.
The ld. Counsel submitted before us that the appeal was filed on 09.05.2020. The ld.counsel further contended during the course of hearing that the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order in SMW(C) No.3 of 2020 dated 23.03.2020 extended the limitation for filing the appeals and subsequently in M.A. No.665 of 2021 had restored the order dated 23.03.2020, in continuation of order dated 23.09.2021. The relevant portions of the order dated 10.01.2022 are extracted herewith. ‘’I. The order dated 23.03.2020 is restored and in continuation of the subsequent orders dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021, it is directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasijudicial proceedings. II. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 03.10.2021, if any, shall become available with effect from 01.03.2022. III. In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 01.03.2022. In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 01.03.2022 is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply’. The ld.counsel stated that upto 01.03.2022, the limitation was extended by Hon’ble Supreme Court and hence, there is no question of limitation.Hence, the ld. Counsel