Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, The Sirsa Bansivat Cooperative & Construction Society Limited, filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order dated 10.07.2024, which confirmed an addition of Rs. 2,23,68,526 related to excess provident fund payment for AY 2018-19. There was a 358-day delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT, for which the assessee sought condonation, citing an accountant's error and lack of access to the registered email ID.
Held
The ITAT condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It found that the CIT(A) had failed to provide sufficient opportunity of being heard and did not decide the case on its merits, thereby violating principles of natural justice. Consequently, the ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the CIT(A) to provide proper opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Condonation of delay in filing appeal; Whether the CIT(A) provided adequate opportunity of hearing and decided the case on merits regarding an addition for excess provident fund payment.
Sections Cited
Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, AM :
Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 10.07.2024 passed by the Ld. Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi.
1213-Chd-2025 2
The grounds raised are as under:-
1. That the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC Delhi has erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant and confirming the addition of Rs. 2,23,68,526 on account of so called excess amount paid to the Provident fund.
2. That the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC Delhi has erred in not giving the sufficient and reasonable opportunity to represent the case before him.
That the Ld.CIT (A) has failed to decide the case on merits of addition of the provident fund paid to the tune of Rs.2,23,68,526/-, which is not justified.
4. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.
3. The Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 358 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. The Counsel of the Assessee has filed an application along with Affidavit on behalf of the Assessee, making prayer for condonation of delay. The affidavit of the Assessee is as under:
1213-Chd-2025 3
1213-Chd-2025 4
We have considered the reasons given in the Application / Affidavit and keeping in view the facts and circumstances mentioned therein, we are inclined to condone the delay.
1213-Chd-2025 5
The ld. DR did not have any objection for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the delay in filing of the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to decide the appeal on merit.
5. At the very outset, it has been submitted by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not giving the sufficient and reasonable opportunity of being heard and to represent the case of the Assessee before him. It has further been submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to decide the case on merit. Accordingly, a prayer was made to send the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication.
Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.
We have considered the submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee along with findings given by the authorities below in their respective orders.
We have considered the submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee along with findings given by the authorities below in their respective orders. We find from the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) though has provided opportunities to the Assessee
1213-Chd-2025 6 of being heard by issuing of notices but in any case, CIT(A) is supposed to pass order on merit on the basis of material available on record. That has not been done in this case. So, keeping in view the element of natural justice, we are of the considered view that an opportunity should be afforded to the Assessee to present its case before the CIT(A). In view of this, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for decision afresh. Needless to say, that the ld. CIT(A) will give proper opportunity to the Assessee to present its case and to furnish necessary evidences and details. The Assessee is also directed to present its case before the Ld. CIT(A) as and when called for and will not contribute in unnecessary delay in the hearing of the appeal.
In the result, all the appeal of the Assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes.