PRIMARY PLUS MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 20(1), CR BUILDING DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5715/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT found the reasons for the 10-day delay reasonable and condoned it. It directed the CIT(A) to decide the issues of the ex parte assessment afresh, after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against an ex parte assessment order was delayed by 10 days. The CIT(A) rejected the application for condonation of delay without considering the explanation or merits, leading to the current appeal before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in rejecting the application for condonation of delay without considering the merits, and consequently, whether the ex parte assessment order should be re-examined after providing a fair hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘F’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri R.S.Ahuja, CA, Shri P.S. Sodhi, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 05.05.2025Pronounced: 05.05.2025

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld.

NFAC, Delhi dated 08.09.2024 for A.Y 2016-17.

2.

The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay.

There is a delay of 10 days. The reasons stated by the ld. counsel for the assessee seem to be reasonable. Accordingly, we condone the delay.

3.

At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment has been made ex parte by the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) has rejected the application filed for condonation of delay.

4.

Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that the Assessing Officer has passed the assessment order exparte. The ld. CIT(A) has simply rejected the petition filed for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) without appreciating the explanation submitted by the assessee and no merits were dealt with while passing the appellate order.

6.

In view of the above facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the considered view that the delay may be condoned. We, therefore, deem it fit to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the issues afresh after allowing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

7.

The ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the issues afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to provide necessary information /documents as required by the authorities. allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open court on 05.05.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →