Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE & SHRI B.M. BIYANI
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 18.11.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 19.12.2016 passed by learned DCIT (Exemption), Bhopal [“AO”] u/s 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2014-15, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).
We have heard the learned Representative of both sides and perused the case record.
At first, we re-produce the operative portion of impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(A):
“2. On perusal of form 35, it is seen that the appeal has been filed on 31.01.2017. However, the order u/s 143(3) of the Act has been passed on 19.12.2016 and the appellant itself in form 35 has mentioned that order was received on 28.12.2016 itself. The appellant was required to file appeal within 30 days as provided vide section 249(2) on receipt of order u/s 143(3). However, the appellant has filed appeal after 30 days of the receipt of order. Therefore, it is clear that there is delay in filing of appeal on appellant's part.
3. Further, it is also noticed that the appellant in form 35 has mentioned that there is no delay in filing of appeal which is not true as vide facts discussed in para 2, it is clear that there is delay in filing of appeal on appellant's part. It should be noted that the legislature has provided time limits for certain obligations under the Act and these time limits have to be observed. It is compliance requirements imposed by law in the interest of proper regulation of the Act. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case of Lava International Ltd Vs CBDT in Civil writ petition No. 8293/2024 dated 30.5.2024 has stated that power of condonation can be exercised to dela with the extraordinary circumstances only which would have led to delay in statutory compliance and the same cannot be exercises routinely. However, in the present case neither the appellant has admitted delay in filing of appeal nor gave any reason for the same. Since there is delay in filing of appeal and the appellant has not given any reason for delay nor requested to condonation of the same, therefore, I am not satisfied that the appellate had sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the specified period. Hence, since, appeal was not filed within prescribed time as provided in the section 249(2) of the IT Act, the same is not admitted.
In view of the above facts, the appeal is dismissed for statistical purpose and not required to be adjudicated on merits.”
4. Thus, the CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s first-appeal on the footing that the same was filed on 31.01.2017 whereas the same was required to be filed within 30 days from 28.12.2016. During hearing, Ld. AR for assessee instantly agreed that there was a delay in filing first-appeal. But, however,
Page 2 of 4 he submitted that it was a petty delay of a few days. He further submitted that the CIT(A) dismissed assessee’s appeal without serving any deficiency letter to assessee. Had the CIT(A) served deficiency-letter, the assessee would have filed a condonation-application to CIT(A) and satisfied the CIT(A) for the reasoning of delay. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is still ready to file a proper condonation-application to CIT(A) and therefore the present case may be re-stored at the level of CIT(A) for adjudication afresh.
Ld. DR for revenue agrees with the submission and prayer of Ld. AR but makes a request to direct the assessee to represent his case before CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.
In view of above submissions of parties; having regard to the principle of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be caused to revenue if the present matter is restored at the level of CIT(A), we remand this matter back to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. The CIT(A) shall give necessary opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced by putting up on notice board as per Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 23/12/2025