Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed two appeals before the CIT(A) for AY 2018-19, one against quantum assessment and another against a penalty levied under Section 270A. The CIT(A) dismissed both appeals due to significant delays of 994 and 862 days, respectively. The assessee contended that the delay was due to the COVID period and hospitalization, providing medical certificates as proof.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) for both the quantum and penalty proceedings, considering the reasons provided. Consequently, both issues were restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication, with a direction to grant the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) for quantum assessment and penalty proceedings should be condoned, and if the issues should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
250, 270, 270A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
Present for: Appellant by : Shri Sumit Ghosh, Advocate & Shri Souradeep Majumdar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Sailen Samadder, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 01.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 01.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench : Both these appeals filed by the assessee are against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order Nos. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1070762913(1) and ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070759092(1) both dated 29.11.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2018-19. Since grounds are common and facts are identical, we dispose of both these appeals together by this consolidated order.
Shri Sumit Ghosh, Advocate & Shri Souradeep Majumdar, Advocate appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sailen Samadder, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.
It was submitted by the Ld. AR in the appeal of the assessee in the quantum proceedings in Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay of 994 days. It was the submission that in regard to the penalty u/s 270 of the Act, which is an appeal against the penalty levied u/s 270A of the Act, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay of 862 days. It was the submission that if the COVID period is excluded, then the delay of nearly 300 days would have been excluded and for the balance period of delay, the assessee was hospitalised and was under the medical treatment for which the assessee has filed necessary medical certificates and the hospitalisation record. It was the prayer that the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) may be condoned and the issue is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).
In reply, the Ld. CIT, DR contended that the assessee has not cooperated in the assessment proceeding. However, in the interest of justice the issues may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re- adjudication.
We have heard the rival submissions. Admittedly, as mentioned by the Ld. Sr. DR, the assessee has not appeared before the Assessing Officer and provided all the details as sought by the Assessing Officer. This being so in both the appeals being the quantum appeal and the penalty proceeding, in the interest of justice the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in these appeals are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.