Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for being delayed by 308 days, without condoning the delay and without deciding on the merits. The assessee claimed the delay was due to not receiving any notices from the AO or assessment order, only learning about the tax liability after receiving a notice for tax deposit.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s order was based on a technical ground and lacked natural justice as it did not decide the appeal on merits. The Tribunal condoned the delay and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merit after providing adequate opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on technical grounds without deciding on merits, and if the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
Order Per Krinwant Sahay, AM : Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 12.03.2024 of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], for the Assessment Year 2016-17.
At the very outset, ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is an ex-parte order and the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for 403-Chd-2024 Kaysons Apparels, Ludhiana
2 the reason that the appeal filed was delayed by 308 days though the application for Condonation of Delay was filed before the ld. CIT(A) but the ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal without giving any finding on the merits of the case. The ld. Counsel prayed that the delay in filing of the appeal was because of the reasons beyond the control of the Assessee as the Assessee had not received any notice either from the A.O. nor did the Assessee receive any assessment order. It came to know about completion of assessment only after the receipt of notice for depositing tax and then they obtained a copy of the assessment from the A.O. and filed this appeal which was delayed by 308 days.
The ld. DR relied on the orders of the CIT(A).
We have considered the submissions of the Counsel of the Assessee and the appellate order passed by the ld. CIT(A). We find that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer in this case is an ex-parte order as the Counsel of the Assessee claims that the Assessee did not receive any notice for the assessment. We also find that the appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is on technical ground as the ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in filing of the appeal and at the 403-Chd-2024 Kaysons Apparels, Ludhiana
3 same time he has not given any findings in his appellate order. It is against the natural justice to the Assessee. Accordingly, we hereby order to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and remand this case back to the file of the CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, 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, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 22 .01.2025.