GEETA KRUSHNA MAHILA URBAN CREDIT CO OP SOC LIMITED NAGPUR,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(4), NAGPUR
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 99 days without furnishing the original affidavit for condonation. The assessee also failed to appear before the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A), indicating a lackadaisical approach.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay due to sufficient cause shown in the affidavit, despite the assessee's non-appearance before lower authorities. The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and directed the Assessing Officer to re-adjudicate the appeal on merits after providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned and whether the matter should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
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
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER
ITA no.246/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2017-18) Geeta Krushna Mahila Urban Credit Co–operative Society Ltd. Block no.13, NIT Complex ……………. Appellant Raghuji Nagar, Nagpur 440 024 PAN – AABAG4081D v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–4(4), Nagpur Assessee by : Shri Suren Duragkar Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Date of Hearing – 29/01/2025 Date of Order – 30/01/2025
O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M.
The appeal filed by the assessee is emanating from the impugned order dated 17/10/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2017-18.
During the course of hearing, the Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 99 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the Tribunal. We also find that the assessee has filed an application dated nil for condonation of delay in filing the appeal which is supported by photocopy of Affidavit. The original Affidavit has not been furnished by the assessee. However, we find
2 Geeta Krushna Mahila Urban Credit Co–operative Society Ltd. ITA no.246/Nag./2024 sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal before us as mentioned in the Affidavit. Therefore, the delay of 99 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal is hereby condoned.
It is worth mentioning here that the assessee nether before the Assessing Officer nor before the learned CIT(A) appeared to prosecute its matter before the authorities below which proves assessee’s lackadaisical and lethargic approach. Despite this, the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee Shri Suren Dugarkar, prayed that the matter be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for adjudication on merits, since the Assessing Officer has rejected the assessee’s case by passing ex-parte order.
On the other hand, the learned D.R. submitted that despite the learned CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunities to the assessee, however, the assessee chose not to appear before the learned CIT(A) and not furnished relevant details. He strongly supported the order passed by the learned CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer.
We have heard the arguments of rival parties, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that though the learned CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer granted several opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its cases, ultimately, the orders passed by him are an ex-parte order qua the assessee and the learned CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer were indeed justified in dismissing the appeal/ case of the assessee. However, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the cases before us, to meet the ends of justice, therefore, we are of the
3 Geeta Krushna Mahila Urban Credit Co–operative Society Ltd. ITA no.246/Nag./2024 opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one opportunity should be given to the assessee to substantiate the cases before the Assessing Officer. In view of the above, the orders passed by the learned CIT(A) are hereby set aside and remit back the appeals to the file of the Assessing Officer and direct him to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merit and in accordance with law. Before passing speaking orders, the Assessing Officer shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
As a matter of assessee’s lackadaisical approach in non-compliance and procedural delays before the authorities below, we deem it fit and appropriate to impose a cost on the assessee for an amount of `10,000 (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) payable to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority and produce evidence of payment before the Assessing Officer. This cost underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and timely compliance during assessment and appellate proceedings.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee IS allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the condition as stated in Para–6 above. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/01/2025
Sd/- Sd/- K.M. ROY V. DURGA RAO ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 30/01/2025
4 Geeta Krushna Mahila Urban Credit Co–operative Society Ltd. ITA no.246/Nag./2024
Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur
