Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was directed against an order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, which upheld an assessment order passed ex parte. The assessee had filed the appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 161 days, attributing it to unawareness of proceedings and issues with appointing a representative.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 161 days in filing the appeal, citing reasonable cause. The matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for a denovo adjudication on merits, with directions for the assessee to remain vigilant and provide correct contact details.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was condonable due to reasonable cause, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD
Assessee by : Shri Abhilasha S. Kakani Revenue by : Shri Sanjay K. Dhivare Date of hearing : 06.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 07. 02.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal pertaining to Assessment Year 2015- 16 at the instance of assessee is directed against the order dated 29.10.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) which in turn is arising out of Assessment Order dated 09.02.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act.
At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessment order as well as the First Appellate orders were passed exparte against the assessee. There was delay of 161 days in presenting the appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The reasons attributed are that the assessee was unaware of the income-tax proceedings; emails were not checked regularly and the assessee; filing the regular returns except the year under Swapnil Dhaireshil Memane consideration and it took some time in appointing the Authorized Representative etc. Given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to represent the case before the authorities. The ld. Authorized Representative emphasized that the assessee will be more vigilant in complying with the notices issued by the department and representing the matter effectively and It is therefore prayed for condoning the delay and remitting the issues on merit to the file of ld.CIT(A) for adjudication thereof.
I have carefully gone through the averments made in the condonation petition filed before the ld.CIT(A) and find that there was ‘reasonable cause’ which prevented the assessee in filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Therefore, the delay of 161 days is condoned by virtue of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 SC .
Considering the totality of the facts of the case and the submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee and there being no objection from the ld. Departmental Representative for remanding the issues on merit to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication, I in the larger interest of justice deem it proper to give an opportunity to the assessee. In view thereof, without dwelling into merits of the issue, the issues on merits are being remitted to the file of ld.CIT(A). Assessee is directed to provide proper email id to the department for receiving the hearing notices from the ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Finding of the ld.CIT(A) is set aside and effective ground of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 07th day of February, 2025.