Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(Appeals) which was dismissed in limine due to a delay of 121 days. The assessee contended that the delay was caused by non-service of the assessment order and non-registration of their digital signature on the Income Tax Portal.
Held
The Tribunal held that the delay was solely due to non-service of the assessment order and condoned the delay of 121 days in the interest of natural justice. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(Appeals) for adjudication on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(Appeals) can be condoned due to non-service of the assessment order and technical issues on the Income Tax Portal.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ)
Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Lifewood Trexim Private Limited,……….……Appellant 14C, M.D. Road, Kolkata-700007, W.B. [PAN:AACCL2326D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-1(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances by: Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, A.R., appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Mrinmay Basak, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: October 14, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: October 30, 2025 O R D E R
The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 09.06.2025 passed for Assessment Year 2017-2018.
The appeal is time barred by 121 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals). It was the submission of (A.Y. 2017-2018) Lifewood Trexim Private Limited the ld. Counsel for the assessee before the Tribunal that the ld. CIT(Appeals) without condoning the delay dismissed the appeal in limine. The ld. Counsel further submitted that the assessee could not file the appeal in time before the ld. CIT(Appeals) due to non- servicing of the assessment order. Shri Raj Kumar Jha, Director of the assessee Company stated vide his Affidavit that the delay occurred due to non-registration of his signature, who is authorized signatory with the Income Tax Portal. The notice of demand and the assessment order was neither served nor attested by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer has not intimated to the assessee via e-mail or through message about passing of the order. He pleaded before me to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and condone the delay of 121 days. He also prayed to remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) to dispose of the matter on merit.
On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative did not raise any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) to decide it afresh.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the delay occurred is only due to non-service of assessment order. By considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, and in order to ensure the principle of natural justice, I am of the view that it is a fit case to condone the delay of 121 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, I condone the delay and remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to dispose of the appeal without (A.Y. 2017-2018) Lifewood Trexim Private Limited any inference on the observations of earlier order passed by him and to decide it afresh on merit. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits of the case, based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised
by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/10/2025.