Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals before the CIT(A) with a delay of 253 days. The assessee claimed ignorance of reassessment proceedings until recovery actions commenced. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeals both on grounds of limitation and on merits.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. It was held that the CIT(A) should have condoned the delay and decided the appeals on merits after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, as the delay did not benefit the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned and the matter restored for adjudication on merits. Whether the reassessment order was barred by limitation.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 271(1)(c), 271(1)(b), 148, 148A, 149
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
Before: S/SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY(KZ) & RAJESH KUMAR
S.B. Combine Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack At-1, Rani Mahal, New LIC Colony, Badambadi, Cuttack, 753009 PAN/GIR No. ACIFS 1273 M (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue by : Shri Prateek Ku. Mishra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 01 /07/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 01 /07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The present appeals are directed at the instance of assessee against the separate orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAFC), New Delhi NFAC), Delhi all dated 30/11/2024 in Appeal Nos. NFAC/2014-15/10191405, NFAC/2014- 15/10191407, NFAC/2014-15/10191481 passed for Assessment Year 2015-
P a g e 1 | 4 16, in the matter of assessment u/s.147 r.w.s. 144, penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and penalty under section271(1)(b) of the Act.
At the time of hearing, ld AR of the assessee submitted that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee on the ground of limitation as well as on merits. It was the submission that there was delay of 253 days in filing of appeals before the ld CIT(A) and the assessee had furnished the cause of delay that the assessee had no knowledge about the initiation of reassessment proceedings as well as the consequential orders passed against it. However, when the recovery proceedings were started and the Managing Partner came to know about the order passed, the assessee took immediate step and filed the appeals before the ld CIT(A). However, the ld CIT(A) dismissed the appeals on the ground of limitation and also on meritsIt was the prayer that the delay in filing the appeals before the ld CIT(A) be condoned and matter be restored to his file for readjudication after hearing the assessee.
Further, it is submitted by the ld AR that the reassessment order is barred by limitation as the reassessment relates to A.Y. 2015-16 and 148 notice was issued on 1.4.2021 without complying the newly amended provisions of section 148 and 148A of the Act. It was also submitted that in view of monetary limitation u/s.149 of the Act, since reassessment notice was issued after 3 years, it is not sustainable in the eye of law. It was also P a g e 2 | 4 submitted that assessee has submitted twice its reply before ld CIT(A) as such finding of ld CIT(A) that the assessee has not complied is not correct.
On the other hand, ld Sr DR submitted that the reasons given by the assessee were not acceptable, therefore, the appeals were rejected in limine and opposed to restoring the matter to the file of the ld CIT(A).
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of lower authorities. A perusal of file reveals that the Assessment Order has been passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and even the CIT(A) has dismissed appeal of the assessee in an ex-parte proceedings without condoning the delay in filing the appeals. On consideration of the submissions of ld AR of the assessee as well as the reasons given before the ld CIT(A) regarding the delay in filing of appeal, we observe that by delaying the appeals, the assessee would not get any benefit, therefore, ld CIT(A) ought to have condoned the delay and decide the appeals after hearing the assessee. In this case, the ld CIT(A) has not condoned the delay and also passed the orders on limitation ground and also on merits without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeals and in the interest of justice, the issues in these appeals are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) and readjudicate the issue afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also P a g e 3 | 4 hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the CIT(A), failing which the ld CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 01/07/2025.