SHRI ASHOKBHAI DEVJIBHAI PATEL,MITANA, DIST. MORBI vs. THE ITO WARD 2 (1) (1) RAJKOT, RAJKOT

At the outset, that the appeal filed late by 47 days. The Ld. AR of the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay, supported by Affidavit. The crux of the application for delay is as under;

Due to accountant was out of station, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is not having knowledge of limitation for filing an appeal. The assessee is outside of Village Mitana for his business purposes. Therefore, the Ld. AR prayer for one more opportunity may kindly be given to the assessee and adjudicate on merit. On the contrary, the Ld. DR for the revenue has no objected to the prayer of the Ld. AR , however the Ld. DR requested that the assessee must be directed to present his case before the Ld. AO, and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.

We have heard both the parties. We note that delay of filing before this Tribunal was due to accountant/consultant was out of station, in support of the submission an affidavit is placed on record. The assessee was not having knowledge about the proceedings of the case. After considering the reason explained by the Ld. AR. In the interest of justice, we take a judicious view that we condoned the delay in filing appeal by 47 days.

Brief facts of the case that the assessee filed his return of income showing total income of Rs. 17,41,590/- was filed on 16.10.2012, The return of income was processed u/s. 143(1) of the I.T. Act. The assessee is engaged in the business of transportation & insurance agent for vehicles. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) of the LT. Act, dated 16.08.2013 was issued and served upon the assessee on 18.08.2013. The accounts of the assessee are audited and Tax Audit Reports dated 18.09.2012 in Form No.3CA/3CD under section 44AB of the Act and copy of return of income were filed during the assessment proceedings. The taxable income of the assessee is computed for the assessment year 2012-13 as under; AS DISCUSSED IN PARA 4 Rs. 7,50,000/- AS DISCUSSED IN PARA 5 Rs. 1,34,175/- AS DISCUSSED IN PARA 6 Rs. 50,000/- AS DISCUSSED IN PARA 7 Rs. 43,375/- AS DISCUSSED IN PARA 8 Rs. 1,20,000/- Page | 3

That the assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. AO, vide order dated 27.03.2015, in the office of the Ld. CIT(A), Rajkot. The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal with following observation: “In view of the above, I have no hesitation in upholding the addition made by the AO both on the facts as well as merits, particularly in the absence of application u/s. 46A of the Rules. As such, no infirmity as found in the action of the AO and the grounds of appeal on merits is dismissed. As a result, the appeal stands dismissed.” 8. That the assessee filed an appeal against the impugned order dated 20.12.2024 before the Tribunal.

During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee not having knowledge of online proceedings. That the Ld. AR prayed for one more opportunity may kindly be given to the assessee to explain the case.

On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR has relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and not objected to the prayer of the Ld. AR.

We have heard both the parties and perused the documents available on record. We note that the assessee has not made the compliance with the notices for hearing issued by the Ld. AO. We note that the assessee was not aware about the online proceedings because the assessee lives in village and there is no internet facility available. We note that the assessee has not gave due care and attention to the case and negligent in pursuing the case and the assessee has also a non-cooperative attitude in pursuing the case for A.Y. 2012-13. We direct the assessee to deposit cost of Rs.1,000/- to the Prime Minster Relief fund (Government of India), the receipt is to be submitted

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.