Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed after a delay of 198 days, attributed to severe illness and lack of access to communications. The assessment order and the CIT(A)'s order were ex-parte due to the assessee's inability to appear.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding the reasons genuine. The case was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication, with directions to hear the assessee and consider the documents. The orders of the AO and CIT(A) were set aside.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal is justifiable, and if so, whether the case should be decided on merits by restoring it to the Assessing Officer.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]
ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 20.09.2022 for AY 2015-16. 2. It appears from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 198 days, for this the assessee has filed a condonation petition., which are as follows-
On perusal of the condonation petition, the reason for delay in filing the appeal seems to be genuine and bonafide. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. Keeping in view, the condonation petition as well as judicial pronouncement that the case should be decided on merit not on technical issue, the delay is hereby condoned.
Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee being an individual filed his return of income for AY 2015-16 declaring total income of Rs. 22,65,490/-. The case was selected for a limited scrutiny as there was substantial increase in his Assessment Year: 2015-16 Manzar Hossain Khan capital as compared to the earlier year and the AO asked the details including the capital account ledger but no supporting evidence furnished by the assessee during the assessment proceedings, as a result of which, the AO concluded that the introduction of capital was a device used by the assessee to avoid taxes and accordingly added an amount of Rs. 2,79,55,490/- u/s 68 of the Act. The AO has also examined the sundry creditor shown as Rs. 1,39,38,818/-. The AO assessed in the income of the assessee of Rs. 13,00,62,780/- against the assessee.
Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeals of the assessee has been dismissed as there was no response received from the assessee.
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us.
The Ld. A.R instead of arguing into the merit of the case has only submitted that the assessee has to give an opportunity to place his case before the AO as the order passed by the AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte order. The ld. Counsel submits that there was an unavoidable circumstance for the assessee for not appearing before the AO or before the Ld. CIT(A). He has filed a petition before this Tribunal stating the reason of his non-appearance.
The ld. D.R supports the impugned order but did not raise any objection in remitting the case back to the file of AO.
Upon hearing the submission of the counsel of the respective parties, we have perused the order of lower authorities and find that the AO has assessed the income when the assessee did not submit any evidence as asked and desired by the AO. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not be able to appear and the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order when no response had been received from the side of the assessee. We have also gone through the petition filed by the assessee and find that the assessee has prayed for reasonable opportunity to place his case before the AO, as the case of the assessee could not be properly considered for want of documents. The assessee filed a petition by making commitment of fulfilling the co-operation before the AO.
Assessment Year: 2015-16 Manzar Hossain Khan 8. Going over the facts of the case and for the interest of justice, we are inclined to restore the case in the file of AO, with this direction to pass a afresh order after hearing the assessee and going over the documents filed by the assessee. The case of the assessee is restored back to the file of AO for fresh adjudication. The order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby deleted.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 26th March, 2025
Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश कुमार) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /�द�प कुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सद�य Judicial Member/�या�यक सद�य Dated: 26th March, 2025 SM, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Manzar Hossain Khan, 2nd Floor, No. 26K, Prasanna Laskar Lane, Tiljala, Kolkata-700039 2. Respondent – ACIT, Circle-25, Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. PCIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail)