Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) as barred by limitation due to a delay of 499 days. The assessee claimed that the additions made by the CPC under section 143(1) were ex-parte and that notices were sent via email, which the assessee had opted out of receiving.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and the Tribunal, observing that the delay was not intentional. The CIT(A) was directed to hear the appeal on its merits after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and the Tribunal was intentional, and whether the ex-parte order passed by the CPC and CIT(A) was justified due to non-receipt of notices.
Sections Cited
143(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Order The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 12-06-2023 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi[hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], for the Assessment Year 2021-22.
The Assessee in this appeal is aggrieved from the dismissal of the appeal by the Ld. CIT(A) holding the same as barred by limitation. There is a delay of 499 days in filing the present appeal
68-Chd-2025 DD Puri Foundation, Patiala. 2 A separate application for condonation of delay has been filed.
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee has submitted that the Assessing Officer ( C.P.C.) while processing the return u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, made additions of Rs. 41,11,316/- on account of disallowance of expenses. Being aggrieved, the Assessee preferred the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, there was no representation of the Assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) noted that the appeal was barred by limitation by 74 days. Ld. CIT(A) accordingly dismissed the appeal in limine.
I have heard the rival contentions and gone thought the record. Learned counsel for the Assessee has submitted that the impugned order u/s 143(1) was passed by the CPC without giving any opportunity to the Assessee to represent against the additions made. That the assessee did not have any knowledge of passing of the said order as the same was not served to the assessee through the physical mode. A copy of the impugned order was sent on email, which did not come to the notice of the Assessee. Learned counsel for the Assessee has further invited my attention to the appeal Form 35, wherein, in the column asking “ whether notices/communication may be sent on email, “ the Assessee has answered as “No”. Learned counsel for the Assessee has further invited my attention to 68-Chd-2025 DD Puri Foundation, Patiala. 3 the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) to show that the notices were allegedly sent by the Ld. CIT(A) on email, which was against the mandate given in the appeal Form 35. Learned counsel for the Assessee has submitted that the alleged notices sent on email did not come to the notice of the Assessee resulting into the passing of the ex-parte order of Ld. CIT(A). Learned counsel has further submitted that even the Assessee did not receive the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) as the same was also sent on email, which did not come to the notice of the Assessee, resulting into the delay in filing the present appeal.
After considering the rival submissions I am of the view that the delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal as well as before CIT(A) was not intentional rather, was due to the circumstances as narrated above. I, therefore, condone the delay in filing the present appeal before this Tribunal.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in my view that the interest of justice will be well served, if an opportunity be given to the assessee to present his case before the Ld. CIT(A). The delay occurred in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) is, hereby, condoned. The Ld.CIT(A) will hear the appeal on merits. Needless to say that the Ld. CIT(A) will give proper and 68-Chd-2025 DD Puri Foundation, Patiala. 4 adequate opportunity to the assessee to present his case. Ld. CIT(A) will serve the notices both by electric mode as well through physical mode. The Assessee is also directed to take care of the notices sent by the Ld. CIT(A) and will promptly appear and file the necessary details and explanations, as may be required. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) will decide the appeal in accordance with the law.
In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.