Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA
PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 21/06/2024 passed by the office of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal, Addl/JCIT(A)-11 Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)"] u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, arising from the assessment order dated 23/12/2019 passed by the Assessing Officer, Ward-4(1)(2), Vadodara (hereinafter referred to as “AO") u/s.144 of the Act.
Grounds of appeal are as under:
“1. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts in dismissing appeal ex-parte.
The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts in upholding addition of Rs.2,22,70,747/- being amount deposited in bank.” At the outset itself, it was noted that the appeal is barred by limitation by 65 days. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee also pointed out that both the orders passed by the AO as well as the Ld.CIT(A) were ex-parte orders. He filed an Affidavit of the Chairman of the assessee society bringing out the reason for not appearing before both the Revenue Authorities as also for the delay of 65 days in filing the present appeal before us. The contents of the same are reproduced hereunder: “1, Jagdishchandra Sukhabhai Patel residing at 30, Sudarshan Co Operative Housing society, Nr. Science college, Jaffarabad, Panchmahal, Gujarat 389001, Chairman of Shree MahibavanVibhag KarmachariDhiran and GrahakSahkariMandall Limited do hereby solemnly affirms and declare as under: Na
That, various notices were issued by assessing officer in the course of assessment from 26.12.2017 to 23.12.2019. Since, we are not conversant with legal procedure and Income tax law, we have handed over the same to CA Keyurkumar Ashwinkumar Soni, Godhra for making compliance of the same. We had various meetings with him and he has advised us to get books of accounts written in accounting software in English to make proper presentation with Income tax authorities. However, we were unable to find any proper person to do the same and in the month of October-2019 we have handed over the task to accountant Shri Amitbhai Solanki. However, before he could complete the work, the Ld. AO had passed assessment order.
That, we have filed appeal against assessment order before Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi. In the course of appeal proceedings various notices were issued, which we have handed over to CA Keyurkumar Ashwinkumar Soni, Godhra for making compliance. However, he has not made compliance for want of books of accounts written in English accounting software, nor got accounts written in English or not informed us about noncompliance, resulting into TAR ex-parte order.
That, The Ld.CIT(A) has passed order u/s.250 on 21-06-2024, hence, appeal before your honours has to be filed on or before 20-08-2024, However, the said appeal is filed on 04-11-2024 resulting in to delay of 76 days in filing appeal before your honours. The said delay is caused due to the fact that we were not aware of passing online appeal order by Ld.CIT(A), only on receipt of call from department for payment of demand the we have verified the portal and accordingly gain knowledge of passing of appeal order. In view of above facts, your honour may kindly appreciate that the delay in filing appeal in ITAT is caused due to unawareness of passing of appeal order and the said delay is not due to any ill motive and intentional. I declare above facts on oath and are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. JagdishchandraSukhabhai Patel Place: Godhra Date: 27/01/2025 I, Keyurkumar Ashwinkumar Soni, do hereby declare on oath above stated facts are true and correct. Keyurkumar Ashwinkumar Soni Place: Godhra Date: 27/01/2025"
Referring to the same, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee contended that the assessee being a Society of employees of Shree Mahibavan Vibhag was not conversant with the legal procedures and income-tax law, but tried their best to participate in the assessment proceedings as well as in the appellate proceedings. But despite best efforts made on their part before they could make submissions to the AO by compiling all data as directed by their Counsel, which took a lot of time,before the AO passed his assessment order. Before the First Appellate Authority, it was contended, that the Legal Representative did not comply with the notices issued and the same was not even intimated to the assessee-society. That, the delay in filing the appeal before us of 65 days occurred because the assessee-society was unaware of the passing of the appellate order and became aware of the same only when they received a call from the Department of payment demand. It was, therefore, requested that the delay in filing the present appeal be condoned and the assessee be provided an opportunity to represent its case.
The Ld.DR vehemently objected to the condonation of delay stating that the assessee has been non-complainant throughout not participating both in the assessment proceedings as well as in the appellate proceedings before the CIT(A) and the delay in filing the appeal before ITAT is a continuation of the lapse attitude of the assessee exhibited before the lower authorities.
Having heard the contentions of both the parties, we are of the view that the assessee has adduced sufficient and reasonable cause for the delay in filing the present appeal before us of 65 days. The consistent plea of the assessee is that it was unaware of the technicalities of law, but still tried its best to comply with the notices issued during assessment proceedings and appellate proceedings before the Ld.CIT(A) by engaging a Consultant, but despite its best efforts it could not submit necessary details to the AO which resulted in passing of an ex-parte order by the AO and since the Consultant did not appear before the Ld.CIT(A), the appellate order was passed ex-parte. Moreover, the addition made to the income of the assessee, we have noted ,pertains to the entire credit in its bank account amounting of Rs.2,22,70,750/- as against Nil income returned by the assessee. And all because the assessee did not appear before the Revenue authorities. Surely, the assessee is not benefited in any way by not participating before the lower authorities or for that matter by any delay in filing the appeal before us. Not entertaining the appeal would fasten huge tax liability on the assessee coupled with consequential penal and other actions. Visualizing this aspect, we are of the view that punishment in the shape of tax liability is disproportionate to the negligence of the assessee of not challenging the ex- parte order in time. Therefore, taking a sympathetic view and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay of 65 days in filing appeal. Further, considering that the assessee has not been heard by any of the authorities below, we restore the matter back to the file of AO for adjudication afresh. The AO is directed to provide adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 30th January, 2025 at Ahmedabad. (KUL BHARAT ) VICE PRESIDENT ( ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad, Dated 30/01/2025 टी.सी. नायर, व.नि. स. / T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित/