Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against an order dated 27.08.2024. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine due to a delay of 98 days in filing the appeal, without considering the merits or providing sufficient opportunity of being heard.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating on merits, despite the delay. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of natural justice and affording the assessee an opportunity to be heard.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal in limine on grounds of delay without considering the merits and affording natural justice to the assessee.
Sections Cited
143(3), 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
Per Krinwant Sahay, AM : Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 27.08.2024 of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi.
Grounds of appeal
are as under: - 1081-Chd-2024 Nishant Goyal, Chandigarh 2
1. The Id. CIT(A) is wrong in not admitting the appeal and dismissing the same in limine. The Id. CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing of appeal by the appellant.
2. The Ld. CIT(A) is wrong in holding vide paragraph 5.1 & 5.2 of his order that the appellant has not made case for explaining delay and documentary evidences in this regard like medical certificates were not submitted, whereas in, the appellant had duly explained reasons of delay and also submitted medical certificates at the time of filing appeal in Form 35 and during the course of appellant proceedings.
The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not granting reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the appellant before dismissing the appeal in limine.
That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned assessment deserves to be quashed having been framed in haste and without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard.
3. At the very outset, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee pointed out that in this case the appellate order was passed by the ld. CIT(A), dismissing the appeal as there was a delay of 98 days in filing of the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). On this issue, Ld. CIT(A) in his appellate order has given his findings as under:-
1081-Chd-2024 Nishant Goyal, Chandigarh 3 “I find that no case has been made out by the Assessee for existence of sufficient cause in the application for condonation of substantial period of delay of 98 days in filing of appeal. I also find that it is also a settled position of law that the delay is un-excusable unless sufficient cause is shown. I further find that proper explanation and reasons for delay have not been given. Therefore, I am of the view that in the absence of existence of reasonable cause and also in the absence of proper explanation and reasons, without being supported by proper evidence, the appeal filed by the assessee late by 98 days, the delay is not condonable. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is not admitted and the same is dismissed in limine”
The ld. DR relied on the order of the authorities below.
We have considered the findings given by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order and the reasons for dismissal of the appeal by the ld. CIT(A). We find that the ld. CIT(A) has not given any findings on merit as he has dismissed the Assessee’s appeal as ‘appeal not admitted’. We find that although the Assessee should have filed the appeal in time, however, at the same time the Assessee should not be denied of natural justice. Even if some order is to be passed against the Assessee, authorities are duty bound to keep in mind that the natural justice is done to the Assessee meaning thereby that the Assessee must be heard before the dismissal of the appeal filed by it. Here,
1081-Chd-2024 Nishant Goyal, Chandigarh 4 in this case, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal because, admittedly, the appeal was filed late by 90 days.
After hearing both the parties we are inclined to remand this case back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Therefore, the case is remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh on merits, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the CIT(A). All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly.
In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for Statistical Purposes.
Order pronounced on 30.05.2025.