Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against an ex-parte order of the CIT(A) for AY 2010-11, which stemmed from an assessment under section 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee sought condonation for a 12-day delay in filing the appeal, citing the ill health of its 75-year-old director, a change in its registered office address, and the non-responsiveness of a previous tax consultant.
Held
The Tribunal found reasonable cause for both the 12-day delay in filing the appeal and the assessee's non-appearance before the CIT(A), thus condoning the delay. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order and restored the matter for fresh adjudication to the file of the CIT(A), directing that the assessee be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Condonation of delay in filing appeal; Setting aside an ex-parte order of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
Section 147, Section 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, ‘B’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH
ORDER PER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, AM,
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order dated 18.02.2019 of the Ld. CIT(A)-15, Delhi, pertaining to Assessment Year 2010-11, arising out of the assessment order dated 26.12.2017 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward No.7(3), New Delhi (in short ‘the AO’) under section 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’)
At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal ex-parte. The Ld. AR further submitted that there is a delay in filing of the appeal.
2.1. The assessee filed a condonation petition dated 27.04.2024 and submitted that the assessee company is presently promoted by retired Colonel Kulbir Singh, aged about 75 years who is not keeping good health.
It was submitted that the assessee company had changed the address of its registered office w.e.f. 17.02.2018 and the notices of the ld. CIT(A) were being served at its old address. It was further submitted that the Director was victim of non-responsiveness of his previous tax consultant, who had provided his own e-mail ID and phone numbers for communication to be received from the Income Tax Department. He, therefore, submitted that the delay may be condoned and the matter be set-aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the matter on merits after giving one more opportunity to the assessee.
The Ld. DR did not have any serious objection to the above request of the ld. AR.
We have considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), it is seen that none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Even though, the ld. CIT(A) has also dealt with the merits but held that since no submissions were forthcoming from the assessee and therefore the grounds of appeal remained unsubstantiated. However, on perusal of the explanation filed by the assessee, we are satisfied that there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing of the appeal by 12 days and the same is condoned. Further, we are also satisfied with the explanation of the Ld. AR regarding the reasons given for non-appearance before the ld. CIT(A). We, therefore, set- aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore it to his file for fresh adjudication after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per law. Grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24th December, 2024