Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, which had dismissed the appeal in limine due to a delay of 161 days in filing. The assessee claimed the delay was due to non-communication of the assessment order as it was not emailed to the correct email ID.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 160 days, admitting the appeal for adjudication. As the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC had not dealt with the merits of the case, the Tribunal restored all issues raised by the assessee on merits to the file of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC should be condoned, and if so, whether the case should be restored to the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 144B, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
आदेश / ORDER
PER MANISH BORAD, AM:
This appeal filed at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC u/s 250 of the Act dated 17.10.2023 which is arising out of the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act for Assessment Year 2020-21 framed on 16.09.2024 by the ITO, NFAC, Delhi.
Registry has informed that the appeal is barred by limitation by 160 days. Application for condonation of delay has been filed stating the reasons. Ld. DR opposed the condonation of delay. We, after going through the application for condonation of delay and also taking guidance from the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (2025)
INSC 382 dated 21.03.2025, are of the considered view that for sub- serving the cause of justice, the delay deserves to be condoned as reasonable cause prevented the assessee from filing the appeal within statutory time and the assessee would not have gained any benefit from delaying the appeal. Thus, delay of 160 days is condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication.
At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has dismissed the assessee’s appeal in limine by not condoning the delay of 161 days and the reasons for delay in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is mentioned in the affidavit signed by the Director of the assessee company which is mainly on account of non-communication of the assessment order as it was not emailed on the correct email ID. Prayer made to restore the issue on merits to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC.
Ld. DR did not object the prayer of the assessee.
We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Considering the prayer made by the assessee and also observing that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has dismissed the appeal by not condoning the delay, we note that sufficient reasons prevented the assessee from filing the appeal in time before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and the same deserves to be condoned. Since Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has not dealt with the merits of the case, we restore all the issues raised by the assessee on merits in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Needless to mention here that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall grant reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and adjudicate the issues in the manner as contemplated in section 250(6) of the Act and pass a speaking order. Thus, all the 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 14th day of July, 2025.