Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's assessment for AY 2011-12 was completed under Section 143(3), resulting in an addition of ₹20,04,743 on account of profit on sale of stock in trade. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but delayed it due to exploring settlement under 'The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme'. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal `in limine` on the grounds of limitation without condoning the delay.
Held
The Tribunal found that the delay in filing the appeal was due to a 'reasonable cause' (exploring the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme) and was not intentional. Citing Apex Court judgments, the Tribunal condoned the delay and set aside the Ld. CIT(A)'s order. The matter was restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, after providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal `in limine` without condoning the delay, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned given the assessee's attempt to settle under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
Sections Cited
143(3), 143(1)(a), 143(2), 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
आदेश / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BOARD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2011-12 is directed against the order dated 23.07.2025 framed by Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 25.11.2013 passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that on account of not condoning the delay by ld.CIT(A) appeal of the assessee has been dismissed in limine being barred by limitation. He submitted that the delay was mainly on account of the reason that the assessee was exploring the possibility of settling the tax dispute under ‘The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme’ and after successfully filing Form No.1, the Department has issued Form No.2 but thereafter the assessee could not proceed with the payment of tax liability. He submitted that the only prayer is to set aside the issues on merits to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. Ld. DR on the other hand supported the finding of ld.CIT(A).
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and return of income for A.Y. 2011-12 filed on 12.03.2012 declaring income of ₹1,86,460. Return processed u/s.143(1)(a) of the Act and subsequently case selected for scrutiny for which valid notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1) were served upon the assessee. Submissions called for by ld. Assessing Officer were filed. Assessment completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 25.11.2013. Income assessed at ₹21,91,206 after making addition on account of profit on sale of stock in trade at ₹20,04,743.
Against the addition made by AO, assessee was required to file the appeal before ld.CIT(A) within 30 days of receiving the Assessment Order. However, in the meantime, the Tax Dispute Settlement Scheme, i.e. The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme has been launched by the Government and the assessee in order to take benefit of such scheme made application in Form No.1 and subsequently Form No.2 was issued on 06.12.2024 asking the assessee to pay the balance amount of tax liability. However, the assessee failed to make the payment and withdrew from ‘The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme’. During this process, time limit for filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A) expired. We further notice that even though the reasons for delay in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A) were mentioned, however, ld.CIT(A) decided not to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine. We however taking note of the facts and circumstances and the ‘reasonable cause’ which prevented the assessee to file the appeal within the stipulated time observe that the delay is not intentional and in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) we condone the delay before ld.CIT(A) and admit the appeal for adjudication.
Since ld.CIT(A) has not decided the issues on merit, we in the interest of justice are inclined to set aside the impugned order by restoring all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee in the set aside proceedings. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 19th day of December, 2025.