Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) challenging an order passed by the AO. The appeal was filed beyond the period of limitation. The assessee submitted an affidavit explaining the delay, stating it was due to her learning accounting and filing procedures, and subsequently forgetting to file the appeal within the prescribed time limit.
Held
The Tribunal, considering the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Land Acquisition Collector Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., held that substantial justice should be preferred over technicalities of non-deliberate delay. The Tribunal found the explanation for the delay to be reasonable and, therefore, condoned the delay.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned due to sufficient cause.
Sections Cited
Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, SURAT
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT
Assessment Year: 2013-14 Maniben Dalpatbhai Patel Vs ITO, Ward – 2(2)(1) 1, Masma, Olpad, Surat Aayakar Bhavan, 394 540 Majura Gate, Opp new PAN – AELPP3888C Civil Hospital, Surat – 395001. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Manish J Shah, AR Revenue by Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 08.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 09.10.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.:
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dt. 20.12.2024 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2013-14. From the records, we noticed that the assessee was 2. ex-parte before the AO and Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as the same was filed beyond the period of limitation.
We have heard the counsels for both the parties, perused the material placed on record and the orders passed by the revenue authorities. From the records, we . Maniben Dalpatbhai Patel, Surat noticed that assessee filed an affidavit explaining the circumstance because of which he could not file the appeal within time before the Ld. CIT(A) which are reproduced herein below: do hereby solemnly affirm and declare on oath as under: I was learning accounting work and also learning to file Income Tax Returns. Further, I state that I was also learning how to file appeals against scrutiny orders of the Income Tax Department. During the course of learning, I failed to file an appeal against the scrutiny order passed in the case of Smt. Maniben D. Patel for the Assessment Year 2013-14 by the Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 2(3)(1), Surat, dated 16-03-2022. Subsequently, due to work pressure and preoccupation, the filing of appeal against the said order escaped my attention, and I completely forgot about it later. As a result, the appeal could not be filed within the prescribed time limit. The taxpayer should not be deprived of justice due to my mistake. Hence, this affidavit is made for the purpose of requesting condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The delay in filing the appeal occurred solely due to my inadvertent mistake and without any intention or malafide motive. Therefore, I respectfully request that the delay against the said order be condoned, and the appeal of Smt. Maniben D. Patel be admitted and she be given an opportunity of being heard and to submit necessary evidence. Granting such an opportunity is in accordance with the fundamental principles of law and natural justice. Accordingly, this affidavit is made today to request that my mistake in not filing the appeal for the Assessment Year 2013- 14 of Smt. Maniben D. Patel be condoned. All the facts stated in this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I am fully aware that making a false affidavit is a punishable offence.
. Maniben Dalpatbhai Patel, Surat 3. Considering the entire factual position as explained before us and also keeping in view, the principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Land Acquisition Collector Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., [1987] AIR 1353 (SC), wherein it has been held that where substantial justice is pitted against technicalities of non-deliberate delay, then in that eventuality substantial justice is to be preferred. In our view the principals of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. Hence considering the explanation put forth by the Assessee by justifiably and properly explaining the delay which occurred in filing the appeal and construing the expression "sufficient cause" liberally we are inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A).
Since we have condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A), therefore without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and considering the fact that there was reasonable cause, because of which assessee could not put effective representation before AO and Ld. CIT(A). Hence the Bench is of the view that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to represent his case before AO. Therefore considering the overall circumstances of the present case, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the file of AO for deciding the appeal afresh by providing one more opportunity to the assessee . Maniben Dalpatbhai Patel, Surat 5. Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the AO shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute which shall be adjudicated by the AO independently in accordance with law.
In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 09/10/2025 Sd/- Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT SANDEEP GOSAIN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Surat: Dated: 09/10/2025 KRK, Sr. PS. Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T.