Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2014-15 was dismissed by the CIT(A) for not paying advance tax. The assessee faced a significant delay in filing the appeal due to acute illness, which has been condoned by the Tribunal. The assessee had not filed a return of income for the relevant year.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to the assessee's illness. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue to the CIT(A)'s file for adjudication on merits, directing the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal in limine without adjudicating on merits, and if the delay in filing the appeal due to illness should be condoned.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 250, 249(4), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B BENCH, PUNE
Before: Dr. MANISH BORAD & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA
Assessee by : Shri Chandan Katariya Revenue by : Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT DR Date of hearing : 13.02.2025 Date of : 05.03.2025 pronouncement आदेश/ORDER PER DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
This appeal by the assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2014-15 is directed against the order dated 25.01.2024 passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC) Delhi u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (herein after also called ‘the Act’) which in turn is arising out of the Assessment Order passed u/s 250 dated 26.03.2022.
A. Registry has informed that the present appeal is delayed by 306 days. An affidavit for condonation of delay has been placed on record and we notice that the main reason for delay is on account of acute illness of the assessee. The assessee was diagnosed with gap L-3-L-4 in the spine which personally affected the day to day working. Considering it to be reasonable cause we condone the delay of 306 days and admit the appeal for adjudication.
The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals erred in dismissing the appeal on the ground under Section 249(4)(b) and ignored on law and facts as the tax Is deducted at source and deposited to the credit of central government against PAN of the appellant.
2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals erred in law and facts by confirming the addition of Rs. 1,41,05,199 based on an incorrect and arbitrary estimation of business income.
3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals violated the principles of natural Justice by confirming the assessment without giving the appellant an adequate opportunity to present their case or considering the reasons for non-compliance. The appellant's failure to respond was due to genuine hardships, which were no adequately considered.
4. The Learned Commissioner Income Tax Appeals has erred in confirming order o Learned Assessing officer by making an addition of Rs. 1,41,05,199 without properly verifying the records and accounts of the appellant's business. The best judgment assessment under Section 144 was made in haste and without proper investigation leading to an inflated estimation of income.
5. The appellant craves leave to add, delete, alter, modify, or amend any or all of the above grounds of appeal and to submit such further grounds as may be necessary required at the time of hearing of the appeal, in the interest of justice and equity.
3. At the outset, and on perusal of records, we notice that ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine in light of provision of section 249(4) of the Act and in not admitting the appeal of the assessee on the grounds that the assessee has not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by him in order to get his appeal admitted.
4. We observe that the assessee is an individual and had not filed return of income for A.Y. 2014-15. There were certain receipts in the hands of assessee which have been mentioned in Form 26AS. However, there is no calculation available on record nor mentioned by ld. CIT(A) to come to conclusion that the assessee was liable to pay advance tax for the year under consideration.
Further, taking into consideration that there was no representation on behalf of the assessee before Ld. AO and the details filed by the assessee before Ld. CIT(A) remained to be on adjudicated since the appeal was dismissed in limine, we therefore in the interest of justice and being fair to both the parties deem it proper to restore the issue on merit to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with direction to adjudicate grounds of appeal raised on merits by the assessee as provided u/s 250(6) of the Act after duly considering submissions to be filed by assessee for which reasonable opportunity of being heard to be provided. Ld. CIT(A) may call for an remand report from the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and then decide in accordance with law. Further the assessee is directed to place necessary details on the date of hearing and should not take unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable clause. Assessee is also directed to ensure that its correct email address and Mobile No. are updated on the Income Tax Website (In case they are changed).
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 05th day of March, 2025.