Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to delay and lack of sufficient cause for condonation. The assessee contended that the delay was due to the Covid-19 pandemic and that they were not given a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to submit substantial documents and there was a delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), and also did not comply with the Assessing Officer. However, in the interest of justice, the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal should be dismissed ex-parte due to delay and lack of sufficient cause, or if a reasonable opportunity of being heard should be provided to the assessee.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
Delay Condoned This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 14.03.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:
The Ld. CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has grossly erred in law and in facts in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. The appeal of the appellant may kindly be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT Vithal L Boria Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 2– (Appeals) and may please be directed to afford reasonable opportunity of being heard.
The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has further erred in law and in facts in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating the grounds of appeal
on merits on the ground that there is in ordinate delay of more than one year in filing the appeal and that the appellant has not furnished sufficient cause. The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the assessment order dated 05.12.2019 was received by the appellant on 06.03.2020 and the appeal is filed on 18.01.2021 due to Covid-19 pandemic prevalent in the country during the time which is to be treated as filed within the limitation period in accordance with the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020 dated 23.03.2020. The appeal of the appellant may kindly be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) and he may please be directed to admit the appeal condoning the delay.
3. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law and in facts in not adjudicating the ground raised by the appellant in respect of the addition made by the Ld. A.O. to the tune of Rs. 17,10,146/-, being Short Term Capital Gains. The addition of Rs. 17,10,146/-being bad in law and in facts is prayed to be allowed.
4. Your appellant craves liberty to add, alter, amend substitute or withdraw any of the ground(s) of appeal hereinabove contained.
3. On going through the record, we find that notices of hearing were issued on several occasions, but the assessee failed to submit the substantial document and also there was delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee since the assessee failed to furnish sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. We also find that assessee had not complied even before the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided to the revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice the matter is remanded to Assessing Officer for conducting assessment de- novo. The assessee shall submit all the submission/documents and Vithal L Boria Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 3– comply with the notices issued by the authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.