SMT PUTTATHAYAMMA ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), MYSORE

This is the appeal filed by the assessee against the ex-parte order passed by the learned CIT(A), dated 20.09.2017, wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed in limine on account of delay in filing the appeal by the assessee.

It was submitted by the learned AR that the reason for the delay in filing the appeal by 47 days was on account of non-receipt of the original demand notice from the AO. However, the learned CIT(A) has not rightly appreciated the same and has dismissed the appeal ex-parte for the assessee in limine. It was submitted the in identical set of facts, the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Smt. Chennabasavamma Vs. ITO in dated 05.10.2018, it was held as under:-

Similarly, in identical case of Shri. Manjunath Vs. ITO in dated 21.06.2019, the Co-ordinate Bench has held as under:-

The learned DR was heard, who has relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. We find that where the assessee is not in receipt of the demand notice under section 156 which is a pre-requisite for filing the appeal before the CIT(A), the assessee has a reasonable basis for seeking condonation of delay. Further, we find that on similar fact pattern, the Co-ordinate Bench has also condoned the delay in filing the appeal in the aforesaid matters which have been brought to our notice. We accordingly condone the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) and the matter is remanded back to the file of learned CIT(A) to decide the same on merit after providing proper opportunity to the assessee.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.