Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Career Point Montesari Siksha Samiti, appealed against an order confirming an addition of Rs. 44,32,458. The assessee had claimed exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiad) as an educational institution, which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) for multiple hearings.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, noting that the delay was unintentional and due to a reasonable cause related to email communication issues. The Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, finding that the assessee was not given a reasonable opportunity of hearing due to circumstances like the Covid-19 pandemic.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was provided a reasonable opportunity of hearing before the CIT(A) and if the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 142(1), 143(2), 10(23C)(iiiad), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC
Before: Dr. MANISH BORAD
Assessee by : Shri R.S. Poonia, C.A. Revenue by : Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT Date of hearing : 01.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 29.07.2025 आदेश/ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
This appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18 is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC) Delhi u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 06.01.2024 which in turn is arising out of the Assessment Order passed u/s 143(3) dated 20.11.2019 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
A. Registry has informed that there is a delay of 365 days in filing of appeal. Assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay along with affidavit. The assessee society is located at Village Renwal, Phulera, Jaipur. The notice of hearing as well as communication of impugned order were made through e-mail on gcsrenwal@gmail.com. Inadvertently this e-mail Id was not operated by the managing person of the appellant society. It was only when the key person of the assessee society visited their Tax consultant and on checking the Income Tax Portal he came to know of passing of impugned order and immediately thereafter the appeal has been filed. After hearing Ld. DR and carefully going through the application for condonation of delay I am of the considered view that the delay is not intentional and delay has arisen due to a reasonable cause. I therefore taking support from the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Master Katiji and Others(1987) 167 ITR 471(SC) & in the case of Inder Singh Vs State of Madhya Pradesh judgement dated 21.03.2025 (2025) INSC 382) and taking a liberal and justice oriented approach, hereby condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.
Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC is wrong, unjust and has erred in law and facts in confirming the addition made by the Ld. A.O. amounting to Rs. 44,32,458/- which is wrong, unwarranted and bad in law. Kindly delete the addition,
2. That the appellant craves permission to add to or amend to any of the above grounds of appeal
or to withdraw any of them.
3. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that on the date of hearing given by Ld. CIT(A) i.e. 29.01.2021 and 27.12.2023, assessee failed to appear and also could not file any written submission. Prayer made for providing one more opportunity of hearing before Ld. CIT(A).
On the other hand Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) supported the order of the lower authorities.
I have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. I observe that the assessee society is registered with Registrar of societies vide Certificate dated 28.06.2000 with the main object to impart education to the Children. ‘Nil’ income declared in the return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 e-filed on 14.07.2018. Case picked up for scrutiny. Valid notice u/s 142(1) and 143(2) of the Act served on the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings assessee claimed that it is an Educational Institution and the income is exempt u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. However Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) was not satisfied and concluded the proceedings disallowing an expenditure of Rs. 44,32,458/- Thereafter the assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed due to non appearance.
I note that out of the two notices of hearing given by Ld. CIT(A) first one was issued during Covid-19 Pandemic and the movement of the general public was restricted to a great extent. Considering this situation I find that the assessee has not been provided reasonable opportunity of hearing. Therefore in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, I hereby restore all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and to decide in accordance with law by way of passing a speaking order as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 29th day of July, 2025.