Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a contractor, did not file an income return for AY 2014-15. The Assessing Officer passed an ex-parte assessment under Section 144, adding contract receipts and levying a penalty of Rs. 1,88,31,796/- under Section 271(1)(C) for concealment of income. The assessee's subsequent appeal to the CIT(A) was filed with a delay of 90 days and was dismissed in limine due to the non-condonation of delay.
Held
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal found that there was sufficient cause for the 90-day delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), citing the assessee's parents' ill-health due to Covid-19. The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine without condoning the delay, despite the assessee providing a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144B, 271(1)(C)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI JAGADISH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 26.08.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by the Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act,1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on 19.03.2022.
There is a delay of 06 days in filing the appeal by the assessee.
The assessee has filed condonation petition stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the petition of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is condoned accordingly.
The only ground of appeal in this appeal of assessee is against dismissing the appeal in limine without condoning the delay of 98 days by the Ld. CIT(A).
The assessee is a contractor and has not filed return of income.
During the assessment proceedings, the A.O has passed order exparte u/s. 144 of the Act and made addition of entire contract receipts and initiated penalty u/s. 271(1)(C) of the Act. The A.O in exparte order passed u/s. 271(1)(C) of the Act has levied penalty for concealment of income of Rs. 1,88,31,796/-. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 90 days. The Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal.
The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R.) of the assessee has submitted that there was sufficient cause in filing appeal, but Ld CIT(A) has not condoned the delay and dismissed the appeal. The Ld. AR has further submitted that the quantum appeal, has bearing on penalty appeal has been set aside by the Hon’ble Bench to Ld CIT(A) therefore the penalty appeal should also be set aside .
The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, has relied on the orders of lower authorities.
We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. There was a delay of 90 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee has submitted the reason for the delay, stating that it was due to his parents' ill-health caused by Covid-
However, the Ld. CIT(A) did not accept the explanation and dismissed the appeal in limine. We have given considerable thought to the matter, and are of the opinion that the Ld. CIT(A) should have admitted the appeal and decided the case on merits. Therefore, we remand the matter back to file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal on merits. In the view of the above, the appeal filed the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
Order pronounced on 29th January, 2025.