Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal for AY 2015-16 against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee faced a delay of 49 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and 70 days before the CIT(A). The assessee is employed as a Head Constable and was on official duty, which caused the delay.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, considering the reasons provided by the assessee as reasonable and bona fide. The Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal was sufficient cause for condonation. Whether the matter should be restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 148A, 149, 144, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ SMC ‘ Bench, Hyderabad
Before: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-Shri Madhusudan Sawdia
(िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Mohammed Yousuf Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 8 (1) PAN:ATHPM1283H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा��रती �ारा/Assessee by: Advocate S Sandhya राज� व �ारा/Revenue by:: Shri R. Kumaran, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 11/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2025 आदेश/ORDER Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This appeal is filed by Shri Mohammed Yousuf, (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”) dated 11.02.2025 for the A.Y 2015-16.
At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 49 days in filing the present appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has filed a condonation petition along with a sworn affidavit,
Page 1 of 6 setting out the reasons for the delay. As submitted by the Learned Authorized Representative (“Ld. AR”), the assessee is employed as a Head Constable (Special Police) in the Telangana State Police Department. During the relevant period, the assessee was deployed on special confidential duty, under orders of the Additional Director General of Police, involving critical assignments related to law-and-order maintenance, VIP security and Ramzan related deployment across various remote and sensitive zones in Telangana. Due to the nature of these duties, the assessee had to remain outside his headquarters for some period, and therefore was unable to coordinate or file the appeal within the prescribed time. The assessee has filed documentary evidence in support of the above explanation, which are enclosed along with the affidavit and enumerated as page nos. 1 to 13. It was submitted that the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional, and occurred solely due to the official nature of assignments. Therefore, the Ld. AR prayed for condonation of delay and admission of the appeal for adjudication on merits.
Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) opposed the condonation and submitted that no sufficient cause has been shown by the assessee for the delay.
We have considered the rival submissions and examined the material available on record. The documents filed by the assessee fully support the explanation. The cause shown is reasonable and bona fide. The delay is also not substantial and denying condonation would result in denial of justice. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we are inclined to condone the delay.
Page 2 of 6 Accordingly, the delay of 49 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
7. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2015-16 against the assessment order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) under section 147 read with sections 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), dated 07.03.2024. However, there was a delay of 70 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) sought explanation and evidence in support of the condonation petition. In the absence of supporting documents substantiating the cause of delay, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation, without adjudicating the matter on merits.
8. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. Before us, the assessee has filed a copy of affidavit and condonation petition, explaining the cause for delay before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is working as a Head Constable in Special Police, under the Government of Telangana. It was submitted that filing an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A) was the first experience of the assessee, and therefore, he required time to enquire and identify a suitable consultant for representing him. During the same period, the assessee was also deployed on duty for the Parliamentary General Elections 2024, because of which he was unable to coordinate and file the appeal within the prescribed period. It was submitted that the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional. The Ld. AR further submitted that as the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed only on limitation, the assessee did not get an opportunity to argue the matter on merits. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it was prayed that the delay before the Ld.
Page 4 of 6 CIT(A) be condoned, and the matter may be restored to the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
Per contra, the Ld. DR objected to the condonation and submitted that no sufficient cause has been shown by the assessee for the delay.
We have considered the submissions of both sides and examined the affidavit and documents placed in support of the condonation petition. The reason explained for the delay, including the assessee’s official deployment during Parliamentary Elections and his first-time experience in filing appeal, appears reasonable and bona fide. The delay of 70 days is not substantial, and refusing condonation would result in denial of appellate remedy, which is contrary to the principles of natural justice. We therefore hold that the assessee has shown sufficient cause within the meaning of law for condonation of delay. Further, since the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without adjudicating on merits, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. The Ld. CIT(A) shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and shall consider all evidence and submissions to be filed by the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty to file necessary supporting documents and additional evidence in support of his claims. The assessee is also directed not to seek unnecessary adjournments and to cooperate in the appellate proceedings.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.