Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee faced a delay of 580 days in filing an appeal due to issues with the impugned order not being available and a change in legal counsel. The assessee claims the delay was due to genuine circumstances beyond their control, not negligence. The core issue is the denial of benefits under Section 12A/12AA due to non-compliance and unavailability of registration status.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay after considering the reasons provided by the assessee. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for a fresh assessment, directing the AO to provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the assessee is eligible for benefits under Section 12A/12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Sections Cited
Section 253 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “CUTTACK BENCH”,
Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Nanak Fogla, AR Department represented by : Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR Date of concluding the hearing : 04.08.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 05.08.2025 O R D E R
PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
In this case, there is a delay of 308 days has been reported by the ITAT Registry, for which a petition has been filed as under:
“For Delay of 521 Days in Filing Appeal under Section 253 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
That the present Appeal is being preferred by the Appellant against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, vide DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1057549516(1) dated 31/10/2023, in the matter of assessment year AY 2017-18, wherein the appeal of the Assessee was dismissed/disposed of.
That the Appellant submits that the delay of 580 days in filing the present appeal is neither deliberate nor intentional, but solely due to the genuine and bona fide circumstances explained herein.
Dream India Transformation 3. That the impugned order under Section 250 of the Act was not made available on the Income Tax e-filing portal nor was served to the Assessee. The Appellant was unaware of the said order and, therefore, could not prefer an appeal within the statutory period.
Upon recently becoming aware of this anomaly, the Appellant filed a formal grievance on the Income Tax Portal and with the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) on 22/04/2025 seeking access to the CIT(A) order, the assessment order, and other relevant records.
In response, dated 27/05/2025, the JAO, vide issue letter bearing DIN: ITBA/ADM/S/26/2025-26/1076489274(1) furnished copies of the CIT(A) order, the assessment order, and other necessary documents, enabling the Appellant to file the present appeal.
That the assessee recently changed its legal counsel and only then the assessee became aware of the pending order of the CIT(A). The assessee being a village level organisation is not acquainted with the Appellate compliances.
That the delay in filing the present appeal was solely on account of the above bona fide circumstances, which were beyond the control of the Appellant, and not due to any negligence or malafide intent.
That in reality the assessee is not liable to pay any taxes and the entire gross income has been taxed by the AO only on the ground that 12A certificate was not available but as a matter of record 12A registration and certificate are always available with the CIT(E) and JAO.
That the Hon'ble Tribunal has been vested with wide and liberal powers to condone the delay where sufficient cause is shown. The Appellant humbly submits that the explanation above constitutes sufficient cause for condonation of the delay.
That the Appellant further submits that it has a meritorious case on merits, and if the delay is not condoned, it will suffer irreparable loss and injury, and the ends of justice will be defeated. PRAYER In view of the above, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly: (a) Condone the delay of 580 days in filing the present appeal under Section 253 of the Act; (b) Admit and hear the accompanying appeal on merits; and (c) Pass such other order(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 1.1 Considering the reasons given in the said petition, the delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.
The present appeal arises from the order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Dream India Transformation Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide order dated 31.10.2023.
2.1 In this case, the Ld. AO passed an order under Section 144 of the Act and has recorded a finding that since there was non-compliance before him by the assessee, there was no opportunity to verify whether the assessee could be allowed the benefit of sections 12A/12AA of the Act. Thereafter, he proceeded to treat the entire receipts (Rs. 1,27,21,007-) as undisclosed income.
2.2 Aggrieved with this action, the assessee has approached the Ld. CIT(A) but there also he could not make any compliance to the notices issued from time to time. This fact has been recorded in pages 3 and 4 of the impugned order.
2.3 Further aggrieved with this action of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has approached the ITAT with the following grounds:
“Ground No. 1: The Ld. AO erred in law and facts by denying the benefits of section 12A of the Act, when the assessee was a validly registered organisation, the contention of the AO there was no way to find the 12A registration status is unassailable. Ground No. 2: The Ld. AO erred in law and facts by taxing gross receipts which is not in the nature of income and cannot be subjected to tax. That the appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend, modify, substitute, delete and/or rescind all or any of the grounds of appeal on or before the final hearing, if necessity so arises.”
3. The Ld. AR mentioned that due to a communication gap between the assessee and his tax consultant, no compliance could be made before the authorities below and even one of the reasons for delayed filing of appeal before the ITAT was attributable to the lapse on the part of the erstwhile tax consultant. The Ld. AR prayed that the assessee may be allowed an opportunity to present the facts before the Ld. AO so that the status of 3.1 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of authorities below.
We have carefully considered the documents before us and have heard both the parties. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances, it is felt that in the interests of substantive justice this case deserves to be remanded back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment. To this effect, we set aside the impugned order and direct that the Ld. AO would frame a fresh assessment order after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 05.08.2025
Sd/- Sd/- (Sonjoy Sarma) (Sanjay Awasthi) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 05.08.2025 AK, Sr. P.S. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. CIT(DR)