Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2015-16, which was delayed by 283 days due to the assessee's advanced age (70 years) and age-related medical issues. The assessee also contended that the CIT(A)'s order was passed without providing sufficient opportunity, thus violating natural justice.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding it to be due to reasonable cause and not mala fide. It noted that the CIT(A) order was dismissed without considering the merits and without sufficient opportunity. Consequently, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, instructing to provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity to present their case.
Key Issues
Condonation of delay in filing appeal; Whether the CIT(A) order was passed in violation of natural justice; Restoration of the case to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
Section 250 of the Income Tax Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, PATNA
Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 02.02.2024 for the AY 2015-16.
Shri Shailendra Sinha appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT appeared on behalf of the revenue.
At the outset, the ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that there is delay of 283 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The reasons for delay as explained by ld. Authorized Representative that assessee is a 70 years old age person and suffering from age related medical issues, therefore he could only approach the counsel on 02.02.2025, whereas the ld. CIT (A) passed and served the order online on 02.02.2024. Due to this, there was an unavoidable delay of 283 days in filing the appeal. The ld. Authorized Representative requested to condone the delay emphasizing that the delay is due to
We after considering the submissions made by the ld. Authorized Representative and facts placed before us, we are of the view that the delay of 283 days in filing the appeal was due to reasonable cause as explained by the assessee and there was no deliberate attempt by the assessee to delay in filing. In the interest of justice and fair play, we hereby condone the delay in filing the appeal. The appeal will now be heard on merits.
The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before the Bench that the order 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 passed by NFAC was dismissed without looking into the merits of the case by simply dismissing the appeal of the assessee. We therefore, feel it necessary and in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, deem it appropriate to restore the issue raised on merits to the file of the ld. CIT (A) for necessary adjudication for which reasonable opportunity to be provided to the assessee to furnish the reply and file relevant details and evidences if needed. It is further clarified that assessee should also not seek any adjournments unless otherwise
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 4th June, 2025.