Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a charitable trust, filed an appeal before the ITAT with a 66-day delay, citing unfamiliarity with electronic working and the Managing Trustee's ill health. The appeal challenged an ex-parte order from the CIT(A) that had confirmed an assessment order under Section 271AAC(1), dismissing the assessee's appeal due to a 115-day delay without addressing merits.
Held
The ITAT condoned the 66-day delay in filing before it. It set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case, directing the CIT(A) to condone the 115-day delay in the assessee's appeal before him, grant an opportunity of hearing, and readjudicate the matter de novo on merits.
Key Issues
Whether delays in filing appeals before the ITAT and CIT(A) should be condoned given reasonable causes, and whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal solely on delay without considering the merits.
Sections Cited
250, 271AAC(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABY T VARKEY & SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA
Years: 2018-19 Rajvidyalaya Educational Trust, Income Tax Officer No.23, Uthira North Car Street, Exemption Ward, Kuttalam Trichy. Tamil Nadu-609 801. [PAN: AABTR8546H] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr.G.Tarun, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. CIT सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18.02.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 21..02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1067011149(1) dated 25.07.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2018-19. Through the aforesaid appeal the assessee has challenged order u/s 250 dated 25.07.2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi.
Page - 1 - of 4 :- 2 -:
2.0 It has been noted that there is a delay of 66 days in the case, in filing of this appeal before the tribunal. In its affidavit the assesse has pleaded that the assesse is charitable trust and not conversant with electronic working of the department. The delay was also attributable to adverse health of the Managing Trustee. All these activities contributed to the delay which was neither willful nor wanton. The assesse submitted that there will not be case of any non-compliance now. We have considered the justification put forth by the assesse and we are satisfied with their adequacy. We are also conscious of the fact that no litigant gains by intentionally delaying its own matters. The Ld. DR did not pose any serious objections to the delay. The Ld. DR however submitted that cost be imposed on the assessee for wasting the time of this tribunal. Accordingly, we hereby condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate this appeal.