Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order for A.Y. 2017-18, which was delayed by 360 days due to the assessee's illness and lack of awareness of the proceedings. The CIT(A) had dismissed the original appeal ex-parte as the assessee failed to appear.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 360 days, finding sufficient cause. It remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits, emphasizing the principle of natural justice and cautioning the assessee to cooperate with future proceedings.
Key Issues
Whether the delay of 360 days in filing the appeal should be condoned, and whether the case should be remitted to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits after an ex-parte dismissal.
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 Piru Prasad Goswami,…………………...………Appellant Vill. Rameshwarkuria, P.O. Pandua, Bankura-722206, West Bengal [PAN:AKSPG3059K] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………….…….Respondent Ward-3(1), Bankura, Income Tax Building, Kenduadihi, Bankura-722102, West Bengal Appearances by: Shri Manoj Kataruka, A.R., appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Addl. CIT, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: June 25, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: June 26, 2025 O R D E R
The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 25th January 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2017-18.
The appeal is time barred by 360 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. However, the assessee filed an affidavit dated 24th (A.Y. 2017-2018) Piru Prasad Goswami March, 2025 saying that he was suffering from ‘Viral Hepatitis’ and undergoing treatment for a long period and was unable to do normal activities and was not aware of any notices of hearing and the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). When the assessee came to know about the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee approached the ld. A.R. to prefer an appeal, due to that there was a delay of 360 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, he pleaded to condone the delay.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the assessee was prevented in filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Therefore, I am inclined to condone the delay of 360 days. Hence the delay is condoned.
The contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without going into the merit of the case. He further submitted that the assessee was not aware of the date of hearing before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, the assessee was not in a position to appear before the ld. CIT(Appeals) as he mentioned in the affidavit dated 24th March, 2025.
On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that sufficient opportunity was being provided to the assessee but the assessee failed to appear before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, the ld. CIT(Appeals) has no other option except dismissing the appeal and he pleaded to uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals).
I have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed an affidavit mentioning the reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT. Therefore, in order to ensure the principle of natural justice, I am of the view that it is a fit case to provide one more opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, I remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to dispose of the appeal without any inference on the observations of earlier order passed by him. 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 in the appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26/06/2025.