Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A). The appeal was filed with a delay of 72 days. The assessee's representative did not appear before the CIT(A), leading to an ex-parte order.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal found that the assessee did not receive any communication regarding the hearing before the CIT(A). Hence, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication.
Key Issues
Condo nation of delay and non-representation before CIT(A) leading to an ex-parte order.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA” BENCH, PATNA
O R D E R
PER GEORGE MATHAN, JM:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred as the learned CIT (A)] in appeal no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1060748437(1).
Shri Desh Bandhu Gupta represented both on behalf of the assessee and none represented on behalf of the Revenue.
The appeal of the assessee is time barred by 72 days. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that there is plausible reason to condone the delay and the delay of filing the appeal is hereby condoned.
The first issue, inter alia, raised by the assessee is non-representation before the Ld. CIT(A). Assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order ex parte. Assessee also submitted that neither any message was received nor any e-mail was received nor it was showing on the
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 18.06.2025.