Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 246 days. The assessee claimed that the delay was due to the order from the CIT(A) not being downloadable from the income tax portal, issues with their registered email address, and their limited understanding of online procedures. The assessee also faced difficulties in obtaining a hard copy of the order.
Held
The Tribunal found that the assessee had provided sufficient and reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal disagreed with the CIT(A)'s decision to not condone a previous delay, which had led to the dismissal of the appeal at the first appellate level.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned and if the appeal should be adjudicated on merits.
Sections Cited
250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO & SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER
Date of Hearing – 13/05/2025 Date of Order – 09/06/2025
O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M.
Captioned appeal by the assessee is emanating from the impugned order dated 31/10/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2014–15.
There is a delay of 246 days in filing the instant appeal by the assessee before the Tribunal. The assessee furnished a duly sworn Affidavit dated 04/03/2025, the contents of which are as under:–
“Sufficient Cause explaining the delay in filing the Appeal C. That the order was passed by learned CIT(A) on 31.10.2023. Regrettably, said order was not downloadable from the Income-tax portal. Further, the 2 Purshottam Narayanrao Jadhao ITA no.155/Nag./2025 registered email address was not in use and hence, copy of order could not be retrieved. D. The assessee being a labour contractor was always engaged at the site for supervision of labour and did not have any fixed place of business. The address of the assessee registered with IT portal was also changed and hence no notices could be received. The assessee was not used to working on internet for accessing IT portal and checking e-mails etc. The assessee submits that, he is a lay man and not much literate and does not understand the intricacies of taxation laws and the system-based process of assessment. E. Subsequently, the assessee's tax consultant checked the Income-tax portal but couldn't download appellate order for AY 2014-15 passed by learned CIT(A) on 31.10.2023. It was only then; the consultant apprised the assessee about passing of appellate order. Regrettably, said order could not be downloaded from the Income-tax portal F. The assessee raised grievance on income tax portal on 28.11.2023 and requested to provide copy of appellate order passed by learned CIT(A) so that, further legal remedy can be sought. Another grievance was raised on 28/12/2023. Grievance raised was resolved on 03.01.2024 but copy of appellate order was not attached/ downloadable with resolution. G. The assessee again raised grievance on income tax portal on 03.02.2024 and requested to provide copy of appellate order passed by learned CIT(A) so that, further legal remedy can be sought. The grievance raised is not resolved till date. H. The Counsel of the assessee wrote email to the jurisdictional assessing officer [learned ITO- ward 3(4)] on 26/03/2024, requesting to provide copy of appellate order. In pursuance of diligent online endeavors to procure the Appellant order copy, eventually on 03.05.2024, the counsel Advocate Abhay Agrawal sent his associate, Advocate Manisha Madke, to the office of jurisdictional assessing officer, Income Tax department to obtain the hard copy of the appellate order dated 31.10.2023. Consequently, the order copy was duly received by Advocate Manisha Madke on 03/05/2024. The Counsel had asked her associate to forward copy of order to the assessee. However, the associate left the job and there was some communication gap between her and the deponent. As on date, the appellate order copy remains un-uploaded on the Income-tax portal. The assessee has been diligently pursuing all avenues to expeditiously obtain the appellate order copy. J. Subsequently, the mistake was revealed when demand recovery notice was received and deponent enquired his consultant. The assessee immediately thereafter, on the advice of its legal Counsel proceeded to file an appeal against learned CIT(A) order. That the assessee being a contractor was always engaged at the site for supervision of labour and did not have any fixed place of business. Hence, it took further time for assessee to brief the counsel and provide all the relevant documents. That Counsel drafted the appeal and sent papers to the assessee for signature. This took time and finally the appeal is being filed on 5 March 2025 with a delay of 245 days.
3 Purshottam Narayanrao Jadhao ITA no.155/Nag./2025 K. The assessee prays that, the delay of 245 days be condoned in light of aforesaid circumstances. That there was no malafide intention on assessee's part for delay in filing the appeal. In view of above it is submitted that there was a bonafide lapse in delay in filing the appeal before your Honour. Hence, there is an unintentional delay in filing the appeal before your Honour. By delaying the filing of appeal, no undue benefit or advantage is taken by the assessee. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the assessee wishes to challenge the assessment order passed by the learned CIT(A) by way of appeal filed before your Honour with a request for condonation of delay. In view of this, it is prayed that the delay of 245 days may kindly be condoned in order to render the justice.”
We find sufficient and reasonable cause to condone the delay of 246 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee before us.
While going through the material available before us, it appears from the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) that there was also a delay of 510 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the first appellate authority. Such delay was not condoned by the learned CIT(A), who held as under:– “3. ………. It is the responsibility of the person, who is supposed to make compliance as per law and not his accountant to ensure and make such compliance, 2. The appellant voluntarily chose and hired the employee and provided his e-mail id for communication with the Income Tax department and he cannot now avoid the consequences of the acts or omissions of his employee, 3. The appellant cannot take excuse of omission of his employee, 4. If this shifting of burden of making compliance is accepted, the person who is supposed to make compliance as per law will use this practice by just producing affidavit(s) from his employee/counsel as these employees and counsel will not have to suffer consequences of non-compliance.
No case should be left open for unlimited period,
4 Purshottam Narayanrao Jadhao ITA no.155/Nag./2025 6. It is responsibility of the appellant to provide correct e mail id to the Income Tax department, 7. His claim of not understanding intricacies of taxation laws and not being much proficient in working on internet do not give him an edge/benefit over compliant assessees. Considering the reasons stated for delay and facts of the case, the appellant has failed to furnish plausible explanation for the delay and, therefore, the delay in filing of appeal is not liable for condonation. In view of liable for condonation of above discussion, I am satisfied that this case is not a fit case for condonation of delay. It is, therefore, not condoned. The appeal is therefore, dismissed with no comments on grounds of appeal
4. The appeal is dismissed.”
5. We do not agree with the contentions of the learned CIT(A) and consequently, we direct him to condone the delay and adjudicate the issues raised by the assessee in its appeal on merits and pass speaking order in accordance with law under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 09/06/2025