Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals before the ITAT with a delay of 53 days. The delay was attributed to not receiving timely notification of the ex parte orders passed by the CIT(A), a change in tax consultants, and the order being noticed only recently. The assessee argued that they were prevented from making effective compliance due to lack of proper opportunity.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding sufficient cause for the delay based on the assessee's explanation and the liberal approach to condonation of delays. The Tribunal also set aside the ex parte orders of the CIT(A) and remitted the matter back for fresh adjudication to ensure principles of natural justice were followed.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and if ex parte orders passed by the CIT(A) without proper opportunity to the assessee should be set aside and remitted for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
143(3), 147, 148
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI ARUN KHOPDIA
Per Smt. Beena Pillai, JM: Present appeals filed by the assessee arise out of separate orders even dated 30/07/2025 passed by the Ld.CIT(A)-52, Mumbai [hereinafter the “Ld.CIT(A)”] for A.Y. 2018-19 and 2019- 20.
At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted that, there is a delay of 52 days in filing the present appeals before this Tribunal. In support of the petition for condonation of delay, assessee has furnished following affidavit for both years under consideration:-
1. ***This space is left blank intentionally. P.t.o.*** & 7600/Mum/2025 & 7600/Mum/2025
We have perused the affidavit filed by the assessee seeking condonation of delay of 53 days in filing the present appeal. From the affidavit, it is explained that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) was uploaded on the income-tax portal without the assessee receiving any effective communication or notification by email or SMS. The assessee, being an individual who does not regularly access the income-tax portal except for filing returns, remained unaware of the order. It is further stated that the assessee’s erstwhile tax consultants were not effectively handling his tax matters and that upon appointment of new consultants, the impugned order was noticed and immediate steps were taken to file the appeal. The assessee has affirmed that the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional but occurred due to bona fide reasons and inadvertent circumstances beyond his control.
1. 2.1.1. We find that the explanation offered constitutes sufficient cause. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. Reported in 167 ITR 47, has held that a liberal approach should be adopted in condoning delays so as to advance substantial justice and that technical considerations should not defeat meritorious matters. Considering the facts stated in the affidavit, the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and in the interest of substantial justice, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed time.
1. Accordingly, the delay of 53 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.
1. On merits, the Ld. AR submitted that the impugned order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) are ex parte orders. He submitted that the assessee did not receive the notices issued by the Ld. First Appellate Authority on the email ID mentioned in Form No. 35 and, therefore, was prevented from making effective compliance before the Ld.CIT(A). It was contended that due to lack of proper opportunity, the assessee could not place the relevant evidences on record. The Ld. AR thus prayed that the matter may be remanded to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after considering all issues in the light of evidences available with the assessee.
1. 3.1. On the other hand, the Ld. DR, though unable to controvert the factual submissions made by the Ld. AR, objected to the remand of the matter.
We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides and considered the material available on record.
Considering the principles of natural justice and the fact that the impugned orders have been passed ex parte without effective opportunity to the assessee, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and remit the matter to his file for fresh adjudication. The Ld.CIT(A) is directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law after duly considering the evidence and documents that may be furnished by the assessee and after calling for, if necessary, a remand report from the Ld. AO. Needless to say, the Ld.CIT(A) shall grant the assessee Accordingly, grounds raised by assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes.