Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2011-12, but with a delay of 474 days. The delay was attributed to the CIT(A) order being uploaded under an incorrect tab on the e-portal, leading to late knowledge by the assessee, and no communication via email or mobile. The assessee's counsel argued that the CIT(A) and AO orders were ex-parte.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding the reasons genuine and bonafide. It held that the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order, which dismissed the appeal without considering the assessee's reply and without providing sufficient opportunity, violated Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act and principles of natural justice. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication, providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity.
Key Issues
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal. 2. Validity of an ex-parte order passed by CIT(A) without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee, violating Section 250(6) of the Act.
Sections Cited
250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 250 of the Act, 271(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, `PATNA BENCH, PATNA
Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM
O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:
This appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 27.09.2023 for the AY 2011-12.
It appears from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 474 days for which the assessee has filed condonation petition., which are as follows-
“To. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna. Reference: KB Technic Private Ltd., 3-A. Singeshwar Palace, East Boring Canal Road, Patna 800 001. Bihar (PAN: AAACK9200F) for Α.Υ.2011-12. Subject: Petition for condonation of delay in filing appeal. Reference: Order of CIT(A), NFAC dated 27/09/2023.
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before the Bench that the orders of ld. CIT (A) as well as ld. AO are ex-parte order and is liable to set aside. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before the Bench that the orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s. 250 of the Act was without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee and as such the order is bereft of natural justice and is liable to be set aside.
On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative did not object to such prayer made by the assessee before the Bench.
We after hearing the submission of the parties and perusing the material available on record, we find that instant impugned order
In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29.07.2025.