V MOHAN,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-6(2), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2014/BANG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 September 2019AY 2005-063 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding reasonable cause. It set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue to the CIT(A)'s file for adjudication on merits, providing the assessee with another opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was barred by limitation by 37 days due to the assessee attending to his ailing wife. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal without deciding on merits as the assessee did not appear.

What were the issues?

Whether there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) on merits.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A’’ BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI N.V VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDNET & SHRI B.R BASKARAN

For Respondent: Dr. P.V Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Hearing: 03.09.2019Pronounced: 04.09.2019

O R D E R Per B.R Baskaran, Accountant Member

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 29/1/2019 passed by ld CIT(A)-IV, Bangalore and it relates to asst. year 2005-06.

2.

The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of the ld CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal in limine, without deciding the issues on merits.

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We also noticed that the ld CIT(A) was also constrained to pass the order ex-parte, as the assessee was not present before him.

4.

We noticed that the appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal is barred by limitation by 37 days. The assessee has moved a petition and, in the said petition, it is sated that the wife of the assessee was suffering kidney related disease and due to her hospitalization, the assessee could not attend to income-tax related works.

5.

We heard the ld DR on this preliminary issue.

6.

Having regard to the submissions made in the Affidavit filed in the assessee, we are of the view that there is reasonable cause for the assessee in filing the appeal belatedly before the Tribunal. Accordingly we condone the delay in filing the appeal and admit it for hearing.

7.

We heard ld DR and perused the record. We noticed that the issue contested by the assessee was related to the deposit of Rs.10.36 lakhs made by the assessee by way of cash in his bank account maintained with Canara Bank. We noticed that the ld CIT(A) has not adjudicated the issue on merits since the assessee did not appear before him. From the petition filed by the assessee requesting the Bench to condone the delay, we notice that the assessee was busy in attending his ailing wife and hence the same may be the reason for his non-appearance before Ld CIT(A).

Accordingly, we are of the view that, in the interest of natural justice, the assessee should be provided with one more opportunity to present his case before Ld CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by ld CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them on merits. After affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the Ld CIT(A) may take appropriate decision in accordance with law. We also direct the assessee to cooperate with the ld CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal.

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 4th September, 2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →