SARVESH ASHOK BASER,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC), BENGALURU

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 22-01-2021 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Pune [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2017-18.

We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 58 days. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that the delay of 58 days is saved by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed during National Lockdown imposed on account of pandemic Covid-19. Therefore, the delay of 58 days is condoned.

The ld. AR submits that the first appeal before the CIT(A) was preferred with a delay of 649 days and the assessee filed a letter to condone the said delay. The CIT(A) without going into the merits of the case dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the said delay of 649 days. He argued that the assessee is ready to file an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay and prayed to give an opportunity for the assessee to prosecute the issue before the First Appellate Authority. Further, the ld. AR submits that by mistake the assessee reported double entries in the return of income and the difference of Rs.15,08,060/- due to wrong reporting of income at Rs.43,60,870/- instead of Rs.28,52,810/-. The ld. AR argued that the assessee has a fair chance of succeeding on the issue before the CIT(A). The ld. DR vehemently opposed in remanding the matter to the file of CIT(A).

After hearing both the parties, we note that as pointed by the ld. AR that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without going into the merits, the contentions of ld. AR is that if given an opportunity to the assessee on remand the matter to the file of CIT(A) the assessee would explain the reasons for a delay and has a fair chance of succeeding on merits of the case. On perusal of the Form No. 35, we note that no delay condonation petition explaining the reasons were not filed. A contention was raised before the CIT(A) that the assessee by mistake wrongly declared excess amount and prayed the CIT(A) to correct the mistake, but, however, as we noted above the CIT(A) without deciding the same disposed off the appeal in limine. Therefore, upon hearing both the parties, taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of CIT(A) for his fresh consideration. The assessee shall file an affidavit explaining the reasons of delay of 649 days and the CIT(A) shall consider the same in the interest of justice. The assessee is also liberty to file evidences, if any in support of his claim concerning the issue raised in ground No. 2. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.