AGRAWAL RAJESHKUMAR BABULAL HUF,AMIRGADH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law as well as on fact in upholding addition of Rs.2,88,589 made by the Ld.AO u/s.14A of the Act.

The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law as well as on fact in upholding disallowance of Rs.21,72,779 made by the Ld.AO u/s.43B of the Act.

The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law as well as on fact in upholding addition of Rs.1,00,69,987 made by the Ld.AO on account of prior period expenses.”

The assessee, in these appeals, have taken common grounds of appeal: ”1. The CIT(A) erred in law as well as on fact in dismissing appeal ex-parte.

These appeals are time-barred by 223 days (in the case of Agrawal Rajeshkumar Babuilal HUF) and 101 days (in the case of Dahyabhai Ganeshbhai Kugasia in each appeal). Separate applications for condonation of delay in filing these appeals have been filed by the assessees, wherein, it has been deposed that the assessee(s) was not aware of passing of online appeal order(s) by the Ld. CIT(A). That only on receipt of SMS/Call from Department for payment of demand the assessee verified the portal and, accordingly, gained knowledge of passing of the final appeal order. The Ld. Counsel for the assessees has submitted that the assessees have a fair cases on merits. He has further submitted that the non-representation before the ld. CIT(A) was not intentional and further the delay in filing the present appeal(s) has occurred due to circumstances, which were beyond the control of the assessee. The Ld. Counsel for the assessees has submitted that even there was no proper representation before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel for the assessees has requested that the assessees may be given an opportunity to present their cases before the Ld. AO.

The Ld. DR, on the other hand, has relied upon the orders of the lower authorities.

Considering the aforesaid submissions, in our view, the interests of justice will be well-served if the assessees be given an opportunity to present their cases before the Ld. CIT(A), however, subject to imposition of some reasonable costs. The delay in filing the present appeals is therefore condoned. The impugned orders of the Ld. CIT(A) are, accordingly, set aside and the cases are restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide these appeals of the assessees on merits, after giving adequate , 2085 & 2086/Ahd/2024 Agrawal Rajeshkumar Babulal HUF (2076 )& Dahyabhai Ganeshbhai Kugasiya (2085 & 2086) vs. DCIT-ACIT Asst. Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 respectively opportunity of hearing to the assessees to present their cases, however, subject to payment of a cost of Rs.5,000/- in each case, to be deposited in the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund. The assessees will produce the receipts of such deposits before the CIT(A). Subject to fulfilment of the above condition, the impugned orders of the Ld. CIT(A) are set aside and the cases are restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to decide the matter on merits. Needless to say, that the Ld.CIT(A) will give proper and adequate opportunity to the assessees to present their cases.