Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2017-18. The appeal was filed with a delay of 47 days, for which the assessee provided an affidavit explaining the delay. The CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 47 days, finding reasonable cause. The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) and remitted the matter back for adjudication on merit, allowing the assessee an opportunity to be heard.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal is condonable and whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) needs to be set aside on principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO
The appeal the assessee is against the impugned order dated 06/06/2024, 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 a delay of 47 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. While going through the record available before us, I find that the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the sufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing the present appeal and thus the learned A.R. prayed before me for condoning the delay in filing the present appeal. The original affidavit is placed on record.
2 Vinod Keshardeo Bajoriya ITA no.513/Nag./2024
After considering the submissions of the learned Authorised Representative and averments made in the affidavit, I am of the opinion that the assessee is prevented in filing the appeal belatedly and I am satisfied that the delay in filing the appeal is due to reasonable cause. Consequently, I condone the delay of 47 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit.
4. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee submitted before me that the learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order and prayed that one opportunity may be granted by restoring the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) to enable the assessee to substantiate its case before the learned CIT(A).
2. On the other hand, the learned D.R. submitted that despite the learned CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunities to the assessee, however, the assessee did not appear before the learned CIT(A) and not furnished relevant details. He strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A).
3. I have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. I find that though the learned CIT(A) granted opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its case, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Therefore, I am of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one opportunity should be given to the assessee to substantiate the case before the learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and remit back the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct
3 Vinod Keshardeo Bajoriya ITA no.513/Nag./2024 him to adjudicate the matter afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable 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 this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27/01/2025