Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee-appellant challenged an order of the CIT(A) that dismissed their appeal against an assessment order for AY 2020-21. The dismissal was due to the appellant failing to furnish sufficient cause for a delay of 41 days in filing the appeal, and no condonation application was filed.
Held
The tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) to enable the assessee to file an application for condonation of delay. The CIT(A) is directed to decide the application first after giving an opportunity of being heard, and then proceed with the appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) should be restored for filing a condonation of delay application, given the circumstances.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR
Before: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 734/JPR/2025
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2020-21 Tulsi Sharma Cuke The Income Tax Officer, Vs. 18, Shyam Nagar, Opposite Pink Ward-1(1), City Marriage Garden, Near Tilak Jaipur. Hospital, Agra Road, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: BRDPS3037C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Ms. Ishika Gupta, C.A. (through V.C.) jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 20 /08/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 21/08/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: Narinder Kumar, Judicial Member, Assessee-appellant has challenged order dated 04.03.2025, passed by Learned CIT(A), whereby his appeal preferred against assessment order dated 16.09.2022, relating to the assessment year 2020-21, has been dismissed, and the assessment order, computing total income of the assessee at Rs. 34,31,722/-, has been upheld.
Arguments heard. File perused.
Tulsi Sharma, Jaipur.
A perusal of the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A) would reveal that the appeal filed by the assessee has been dismissed in limine, as the appellant failed to furnish any sufficient cause for condonation of delay of 41 days in filing the same.
From para no. 5 of the impugned order, it is evident that no application seeking condonation of delay was submitted by the assessee before Learned CIT(A).
When confronted with the above observation as to non filing of any application seeking condonation of delay, Ld. AR for the appellant submits that application could not be filed there inadvertently. At the same, she has submitted that the matter may be restored to the files of Learned CIT(A) so that the appellant is able to furnish appropriate application to seek condonation of delay. Ld. DR for the department has no objection to the restoration of the appeal before Learned CIT(A).
As is available from the impugned order, appeal was instituted before Learned CIT(A), NFAC on 26.11.2022. It remained pending there upto 04.03.2025. However, it appears that for want of proper legal advice no application seeking condonation of delay was ever filed.
Tulsi Sharma, Jaipur. In the given situation, in the interest of justice, we deem it a fit case to restore the matter before Learned CIT(A) so as to enable the assessee- appellant to file an application seeking condonation of delay supported by requisite details, if so desired. Result 7. Consequently, this appeal is disposed of, for statistical purpose and the matter is remanded to Learned CIT(A) for decision afresh. Learned CIT(A) firstly to dispose of application, if any, presented seeking condonation of delay, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the applicant, and then to proceed in accordance with law. File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 21/08/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 21/08/2025 *Santosh आदेश की प्रतिलिपिअग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू The Appellant- Tulsi Sharma, Jaipur. 1. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward-1, Jaipur. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेजज. त्महपेजतंत