DEVENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD DAUSA, DAUSA

The registry has informed that there is a delay of 328 days in filing of the appeal before this Tribunal. Application for condonation Dausa and his dependent upon his tax consultant and was unaware about the impugned ex-parte order of ld. CIT(A). Ld. DR opposed the condonation of delay, I have carefully gone through the reasons mentioned in the affidavit filed for condonation of delay and observe that there is a reasonable cause which prevented the assessee from filing the appeal before this tribunal within permissible time limit. I also note that the assessee would not have gained from delay in filing the appeal. Since the delay is not intentional and therefore, taking liberal approach and following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder 3. With the assistance of the both sides, I have gone throw the records carefully. The impugned order is ex-parte. Ld. CIT(A) has summarily dismissed the appeal without passing a speaking order as contemplated in section 250(6) of the Act. Ld. DR raised no objection if the issues raised in the instant appeal are restored to Devendra Kumar Sharma vs. ITO 3 file of ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. 4. Considering the given facts and circumstances of the case, in the larger interest of justice and placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT(C) vs. Prem Kumar Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that ld. CIT(A), NFAC is obliged to dispose all the appeals on merits even an ex-parte order, I hereby remit back all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and to pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of being heard should be granted to the assessee. The assessee should also refrain from seeking unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 03/07/2025. ¼ euh"k cksjkM ½