Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal 126 days late against an ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee claimed non-receipt of notice for the appellate proceedings and provided e-filing portal screenshots as evidence, filing an affidavit for condonation of delay.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 126 days, accepting the assessee's bona fide reason of non-receipt of notice for CIT(A) proceedings. The matter was restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity, with a caution for cooperation.
Key Issues
Condonation of delay in filing appeal due to non-receipt of notice for CIT(A) proceedings; restoration of the matter to Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA
आदेश / O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Mumbai, dated 07.03.2024 passed for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At the outset, on perusal of the appeal record, I find that the appeal of the assesse is filed belatedly by 126 days. In this regard, the assesse has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit stating sufficient reasons for delay in filing the appeal. In the said affidavit, the assesse has sworn that the assesse has not received any notice with regard to appellate either through e-filing portal or through hard copy. In this regard, the assesse has enclosed the screenshots of the e-filing portal upto the date of filing the appeal before the Tribunal which shows that no notice even served on the assesse before passing the ex-parte order. Thus, the ld. AR submitted that the delay of 126 days in filing the present appeal is bonafide and the same may kindly be 2 ITANo.251/KOL/2025 condoned and the assesse may be given one more opportunity to represent his case before the ld. CIT(A).
On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR though vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below, however, could not bring anything on record to object the delay in filing the appeal by the assesse.
After hearing the submission of the parties and perusing the material available on record, I find force in the contentions of the assesse stated on oath in the affidavit which shows that the assesse has not received any notice of proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) except receiving the ex-parte order passed by ld. CIT(A), which was dismissed without looking into the merits of the case by simply dismissing the appeal of the assessee. This contention of the assesse is supported with the screenshots of the e-filing portal. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, I condone the delay of 126 days in filing the present appeal. A further perusal of the impugned order states that the assessee was non-compliant before the ld. CIT(A) and the assessee could not file any details before the ld. CIT(A), I, therefore, feel it necessary and in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, deem it appropriate to restore the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A), for necessary adjudication for which reasonable opportunity to be provided to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), failing which the ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.