Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which had dismissed the appeal for non-compliance. The appeal was filed with a delay of 308 days. The assessee claimed the delay was due to incorrect email addresses being used for communication by the CIT(A), leading to the assessee's lack of awareness about the proceedings.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged that the delay in filing the appeal was due to circumstances beyond the assessee's control, specifically the incorrect communication of notices. Therefore, the delay was condoned. The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remitted the matter back for a de novo adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned due to incorrect email communication by the appellate authority, and whether a de novo adjudication is warranted.
Sections Cited
145(1), 143(2), 142(1), 144, 250, 271(1)(c), 253(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: MS. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH
िनधार्िरती की ओर से /Appellant by Shri P.M.Jagasheth, CA राज�व की ओर से /Respondent by Ms. Namita Patel, Sr-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 25/08/2025 उ�घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 26/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R
PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM:
This appeal by the assessee emanates from the order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 18.01.2024 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015- 16, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 22.12.2017.
Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:
1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in rejecting the books of account u/s.145(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO in making addition of Rs.85,85,684/- on account of total expenditure debited to profit and loss account without considering the material available on records.
3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO in considering the all the expenditure as non genuine.
4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO not considering the fact that the net profit with interest and remuneration to partners, show is above 8 percent of the gross receipts.
5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO i initiating penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act.
6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has not offered adequate opportunities to hear, hence, the case may please be set aside and restored back to the CIT(A) or AO for sake of the interest of natural justice.
7. It is, therefore, prayed that the above addition may please be deleted as learned members of the tribunal may deem it proper.”
3. The appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 308 days in terms of provisions of section 253(3) of the Act. The assessee has filed an affidavit giving reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee submitted that during the filing of appeal before CIT(A), his consultant had clearly mentioned the Email ID: ca.mihirthakkar@gmail.com for communication, however, during appellate proceedings before CIT(A), all notices for hearing were issued on Email ID: jodhani.ashok0677@gmail.com and jodhani.ashok@gmail.com, which had been created by his old tax consultant for filing of return of income only and was not used for any correspondence for long time. The appellant was unaware of dismissal of appeal by CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi. Besides, assessee was not informed about the aforesaid hearing notices and order of CIT(A) by his old consultant due to which he could not file second appeal before the Tribunal, in stipulated time.
Subsequently, when he came to know about the CIT(A)'s order, then he immediately downloaded the same and filed appeal before this Tribunal. The appellant submitted that the delay in filing appeal was neither wilful nor deliberate, but due to the circumstances beyond his control. He requested that in the interest of justice, the delay may be condoned, and the appeal may be decided on merit.
On the other hand, learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr.
DR) for the revenue submitted that assessee has failed to offer sufficient cause for the delay, hence, delay should not be condoned. She, however, submitted that the Bench may decide the preliminary issue as it thinks fit.
We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue of delay in filing appeal. In the affidavit, it is submitted that all notices issued by CIT(A) was sent on email id of assessee's previous tax consultant and not in the email id given in Form-35. Considering all these facts, we find that assessee was unaware of the proceedings so that he was unable to file appeal before the Tribunal in time. Hence, the reasons given in the affidavit for condonation of delay are reasonable and the same would constitute sufficient cause for the delay in filing this appeal. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice.
Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed his e-return of income for the AY 2015-16 on 24.10.2015 by declaring total income at Rs.47,500/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS and the reason for scrutiny selection was 'Low income compared to large commission receipts'. Notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee during the assessment proceedings, calling for details on relevant issues. In compliance, assessee could not furnish necessary details/documents except for copy of ROI, computation of income, balance sheet, bank statement and partnership deed. The AO show caused as to why expenditure of Rs.85,85,684/- as claimed in the profit and loss account should not be disallowed and added to his total income for the year under consideration. The However, the assessee did not submit the required details despite of ample opportunities provided to him. In view of the same, the aforesaid expenditure of Rs.85,85,684/- was disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee. The AO passed his best judgment u/s.144 of the Act wherein total income of the assessee was determined at Rs.86,33,180/-. Aggrieved by the disallowance made by AO, the assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A).
During appellate proceeding, several notices were issued by CIT(A) with the request to furnish necessary details relating to grounds of appeal.
However, appellant did not reply to the aforesaid notices. The CIT(A) observed that non-compliance to these notices shows that appellant was not interested in pursuing his appeal. According to CIT(A), the nature of expenses disallowed being indirect expenses, could have been easily justified by the assessee by producing supporting documents. However, the same were neither produced before the AO nor appellant had tried to make amends during the appellate proceedings. Therefore, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed present appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee was not given adequate opportunity of hearing by the CIT(A). He further submitted that the CIT(A) has passed the order u/s 250 of the Act on 18.01.2024 without properly hearing the assessee. The assessee submitted that during the filing of appeal before CIT(A), his consultant had clearly mentioned the Email ID: ca.mihirthakkar@gmail.com for communication, however, during appellate proceedings before CIT(A), all notices for hearing were issued on Email ID: jodhani.ashok0677@gmail.com and jodhani.ashok@gmail.com, which was created by his old tax consultant for filing of return of income only and was not used for any correspondence for long time. Besides, assessee was not informed about the aforesaid hearing notices by his old consultant due to which he could not properly represent his case before CIT(A). According to Ld. AR, adequate opportunity of hearing was not given to the assessee, therefore, it was requested that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the CIT(A).
On the other hand, Ld. Sr-DR for the revenue submitted that assessee was negligent and careless during the appellate proceedings; hence, appeal of the assessee should be dismissed.
We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has been non-cooperative to the statutory notices and the show cause notice issued to him by the AO. In spite of being ample opportunities, assessee failed to furnish cogent reasons/documentary evidence in response to notices issued by CIT(A). The AR submitted that notices were sent on wrong email id due to which appellant could file reply and supporting documents. Considering the peculiar facts of the case, we are of the view that the principles of natural justice would call for giving another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, we hold that the interests of justice would be met in case the CIT(A) re-adjudication the entire issue afresh subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) by the assessee to the credit of the “PM National Relief Fund” within three weeks from receipt of this order. Subject to payment of above cost, we set aside the order of CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of CIT(A) with a direction to pass de novo appellate order in accordance with law after granting adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to be more vigilant and diligent and to furnish all details and explanations as needed by the CIT(A) by not seeking adjournment without A.Y 14-15 Dwarkesh & Co. valid reasons. With these directions, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
11. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.