Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)) was dismissed because the CIT(A) refused to condone a 44-day delay in filing the appeal, finding no sufficient cause. The assessee, Micky Metals Limited, then appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) seeking condonation of this delay and restoration of the appeal for fresh adjudication on merits.
Held
The ITAT, after considering the submissions, found the reasons provided for the 44-day delay to be bona fide and genuine. Consequently, the Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) for a decision on merit, directing that the assessee be afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the 44-day delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned, and the appeal restored for adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA
(Assessment Year: 2022-23) Income Tax officer, Micky Metals Limited Ward 3(1), 1st Floor suite No.103, Aayakar Bhawan Kolkata, Haute Street, Cororate Park, Vs. P-7, Chowringhee Square, Topsia, Kolkata-700046 Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADCM2196H Assessee by : Shri Amit Agarwal, AR Revenue by : Shri Sallong Yaden, DR Date of hearing: 30.10.2025 Date of pronouncement: 30.10.2025 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JM:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [the learned CIT (A)] (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] in appeal no. ITBA/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [the learned CIT (A)/S/250/2024- 25/1071742845(1) dated 31.12.2024 for the AY 2022-23.
Shri Amit Agarwal appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sallong Yaden appeared on behalf of the revenue.
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by not condoning the delay of 44 days on the ground that no sufficient cause was demonstrated by the assessee for late filing of the appeal. Therefore, the assessee prayed that the delay of 44 days may be condoned and
The learned DR on the other hand left the issue to the wisdom of the Bench.
After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the learned CIT (A) has not condoned the delay of 44 days for late filing of the appeal for the reason that the delay has no bonafide and genuineness reason. We have gone through the reasons attributable to late filing of appeal and found that the reasons are bonafide and genuine and accordingly, we condone the delay of 44 days. In the same breath, we restore the appeal to the file of the learned CIT (A) to decide the appeal on merit after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30.10.2025.