MOHAN SINGH,SAMANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 BARNALA, BARNALA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1058/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) considering the facts and the affidavit. However, the Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not passed a speaking order on merits, and therefore, remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation. The delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was 52 days. The assessee's legal heir filed an affidavit explaining the delay was due to the assessee's death and the heir's travel from Oman.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal as barred by limitation without adjudicating the grounds on merit, and whether the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) was sufficiently explained.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

For Appellant: Shri Arman Cajla, Advocate and Sh. Rakesh Cajla, Advocate
For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Hearing: 26.05.2025Pronounced: 28.05.2025

Per Krinwant Sahay, AM : Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 16.07.2024 of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi.

1058-Chd-2024 Mohan Singh, Samana 2 2. Grounds of appeal are as under: -

1.

That the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is bad in law and against facts of the case.

2.

That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal (s) is not justified in dismissing the appeal as barred by limitation which was delayed of 52 days.

3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal(s) is failed to appreciate the fact that reasonable and sufficient cause for delay in filing the appeal was furnished. The reason for delay in appeal was the sudden death of the prop. during the proceedings. 4. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal (s) is erred in not adjudicating the grounds of appeal

taken before him.

5. The appellant Craves leave to add, amend or delete any of the ground (s) of appeal before it is finally heard.

3.

At the very outset, Registry has pointed out that the appeal is barred by limitation period of 31 days. The Assessee has already filed a letter requesting for the condonation of delay along with an Affidavit on this issue, which is reproduced as under:-

1058-Chd-2024 Mohan Singh, Samana 3

4.

Keeping in view the facts and issue brought on record in the form of an Affidavit, we are inclined to condone the delay in filing of the appeal.

5.

The Revenue had no objection in the condonation of delay 1058-Chd-2024 Mohan Singh, Samana 4 6. We have considered the reasoning for dismissing of the appeal by the Ld. CIT(A) and we find that although the appeal has been dismissed because there was a delay of 52 days in filing of the appeal before CIT(A), still then the CIT(A) was required to pass a speaking order on merit on the basis of material available on record, that was not done by the CIT(A). Accordingly, keeping in view the element of natural justice to the Assessee, we are of the view that the case should be remanded back to the CIT(A) to adjudicate it afresh on merit. 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.

9.

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for Statistical Purposes.

Order pronounced on 28.05.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →