GOOD JUICERTY PRIVATE LTD,PUNE vs. CIT(A), WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

When the case called for none appeared on behalf of the assessee. On the previous two occassions also assessee failed to appear. We therefore proceed ex-parte qua assessee for adjudication of these appeals with the able assistance of Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) and available records.

We have heard Ld. DR and perused the record placed before us. We observe that in the impugned orders Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine being barred by limitation by 497 and 556 days. From going through the submissions filed by the assessee before Ld. CIT(A), the reason for delay in filing the appeal is claimed to be on account of non communication of the assessment as well as penalty orders which were passed during the Covid-19 Pandemic restriction period and also assessee company was not into business operation since the lock down until 2022. We on considering the fact that the assessee had a reasonable cause preventing it to file the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) within the prescribed time limit and also in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties condone the delay in filing of the appeal by the assessee before Ld. CIT(A) against the impugned assessment and penalty order framed for A.Y. 2018-19. We further direct Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the grounds raised on merits before us and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s 250 of the Act. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.