Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order of the CIT(A)/NFAC. The appeal was delayed by 23 days due to the assessee's inability to realize the order was passed, as communication channels were inoperative. The assessee claimed no intentional delay and sought an opportunity to contest the appeal on merits.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, acknowledging it was minor and not intentional. Observing that the ex-parte order was passed without physical notice and substantial rights of the assessee were at stake, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits, emphasizing the principle of natural justice.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the assessee should be given an opportunity to present its case on merit.
Sections Cited
68 of the Income Tax Act, 250 of the Income Tax Act, 254(1) of the Income Tax Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER;
This appeal by assessee is directed against the ex-parte order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 20.06.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11, wherein addition on account of unexplained credit under section 68 of Rs. 10.57 Crore and other additions made by Assessing officer (AO) was upheld.
Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The ld. Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that there is delay of 23 days in filing appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has filed its affidavit for condonation of delay.
The ld. AR submits that the assessee could not realized about passing of order by ld. CIT(A). The e-mail address of assessee was assessable by ITA 5851/Mum/2025 (AY 2010-11) New Age Knowledge Solutions Limited former employee, who left the services issued to cessation of work and it become inoperative. In absence of proper staff, the assessee company could not realized about passing of the order and on coming to know the present appeal is filed. The delay in filing is not intentional. On merit, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that while filing appeal before ld. CIT(A), in Form 35, the assessee in column related to service of notice through e-mail opted as “No”. The notice through e-mail was not realized by assessee as there was no staff in the office of Assessee Company.
Therefore, no compliance could be made before ld. CIT(A). Resultantly, ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte order. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that one more opportunity may be allowed to assessee to contest the appeal on merit. He undertakes on behalf of the assessee to be more vigilant in future in making timely compliance.
On the other hand, learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr.
DR) for the Revenue not seriously opposed the plea of ld. AR of the assessee for condoning the delay or in seeking restoration of matter to the file of ld. CIT(A).
We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the lower authorities carefully. Firstly, we are considering the plea in condonation of delay raised by ld. AR of the assessee.
Considering the fact that there is minor delay in 23 days in filing the appeal. On considering the explanation offered by ld. AR of the assessee. We find that there is no intentional or deliberate delay in ITA 5851/Mum/2025 (AY 2010-11) New Age Knowledge Solutions Limited filing appeal. Thus, delay in filing appeal before Tribunal is condoned.
Now, adverting to merits of the case.
We find that ld. CIT(A) passed the order in ex-parte proceedings by taking view that despite service of various notice under section 250, the assessee has not furnished written submission. Considering the fact that assessee has opted “No” in Form 35 and ultimately ex-parte order was passed by ld CIT(A). No physical notice was served. We find that substantial rights of assessee are in the present appeal. Further, before us, the ld. AR of the assessee has undertaken to be more vigilant in future in making timely compliance. Therefore, keeping in view the principle of natural justice, the matter is restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide all the issues on merit. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant in future in making timely compliance. In the result, grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.