VIJAYAKUMAR SIVANNDAN NAIR,CHERTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA

Vijayakumar Sivanndan Nair 2. We have heard rival submission and considered the document available on record. The Ld. AO completed the assessment by additions amount to Rs. 89,97,600/- related unexplained investment and amount to Rs. 224,000/- related unexplained money. The aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A).The Ld.AR stated that appeal was filed with a delay of 268 days before the Ld. CIT(A) against the order of Ld.AO. The Ld. CIT(A) passed the order without considering the merit of the case and rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us.

The Ld. CIT(A), however, rejected the appeals on the ground of limitation, without allowing reasonable opportunity to the assessee on merits. In our considered view, reasonable opportunity was denied to the assessee for advancing his claim. We, therefore, deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication de novo on the issue of limitation, by adopting a lenient approach.

The Ld. DR argued but had not made any strong objection against the decision of the bench.

The assessee is directed to file an affidavit before the Ld. CIT(A) explaining the delay with sufficient cause. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, so as not to prejudice the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A). Needless to add, the assessee shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard before the appellate order is passed. At the same time, the assessee is expected to be diligent and co-operative in the set-aside proceedings to facilitate expeditious disposal of the appeal.