EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION STAFF CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-4(1), HYDERABAD

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, a Co- operative Society, had preferred appeal before Ld. First Appellate Authority against the order of learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) passed u/s 143(3) of the income tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) dated 27.12.2019. Before the Ld. First Appellate Authority, the assessee's appeal was found to be delayed by 36 days. The Ld. First Appellate Authority rejected the condonation request of the 4 assessee. As a result, the appeal was dismissed without adjudication on merits.

Aggrieved with the order of Ld. First Appellate Authority, the assessee is in appeal before us.

Before us, the Ld. AR submitted that the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority was due to genuine reasons beyond the control of the assessee. It was explained that the assessment order was not physically served but uploaded on the Income Tax Portal. Initially, when the Chartered Accountant checked the portal, the order was not visible. Assuming that the order would be sent by post, no immediate action was taken. However, upon a subsequent review of the portal on 05.02.2020, the order was found, and the Chartered Accountant informed the appellant. During this period, the Secretary handling Income Tax matters was transferred to Siddipet, and there was a time gap before a new Secretary was appointed. The appeal was prepared and filed on 02.03.2020, leading to a delay of 36 days. The assessee submitted an affidavit explaining these circumstances and 5 pleaded that the delay was neither intentional nor for any undue advantage. It was further argued that the Ld. First Appellate Authority ought to have considered these reasonable grounds and condoned the delay in the interest of justice.

Per contra, the Ld. DR opposed the condonation of delay. He submitted that the assessee had sufficient time to verify the IT portal and file the appeal within the prescribed time. The claim that the order was not immediately visible on the portal is not a valid ground for condonation, as it is the assessee’s responsibility to track important assessment orders. The Ld. DR further argued that the reasons cited for the delay, such as the transfer of the Secretary, were not sufficient cause and that the Ld. First Appellate Authority was correct in rejecting the condonation request.

We have considered the rival contentions and perused the material available on record in view of the submissions made by either side. In the present case, the assessee has explained the delay by stating that the assessment order was initially not visible on the Income Tax Portal and that there was a temporary 6 administrative gap due to the transfer of the Secretary handling tax matters. In our considered opinion, the delay was not deliberate and was caused due to genuine practical difficulties. Considering the interest of justice, we hold that the delay of 36 days before the Ld. First Appellate Authority should be condoned. Since the Ld. First Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal purely on technical grounds without adjudicating on merits, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. First Appellate Authority for fresh adjudication on merits. The Ld. First Appellate Authority shall hear the assessee and decide the appeal on merits, in accordance with the law, after providing due opportunity of being heard.