Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18 was filed against an assessment order dated 20.12.2019, with a delay of 775 days. The CIT(A)/NFAC refused to condone this delay, stating that the condonation petition did not provide sufficient supportive material.
Held
The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s refusal to condone the delay unsustainable in law, referring to the Supreme Court's decision in *Cognizance For Extension Of Limitation* (2022) 441 ITR 722 (SC), which excluded the Covid-19 pandemic period (15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022) for limitation purposes. Accordingly, the assessee's appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in refusing to condone a 775-day delay in filing an appeal, considering the Supreme Court's directive regarding the exclusion of the Covid-19 pandemic period for limitation.
Sections Cited
Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1064270206(1), dated 22.04.2024, passed by the learned CIT(Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, in Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the “Act”.
Heard both the parties at length. Suffice to say, it emerges during the course of hearing at the outset that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC’s impugned lower appellate discussion has refused to condone delay of 775 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 4.3.2022 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 20.12.2019 for the sole reason that the condonation petition did not disclose any sufficient supportive material.
Faced with this situation, learned Departmental Representative could hardly dispute the clinching fact that Hon’ble Apex Court land mark decision in Cognizance For Extension Of Limitation in re. (2022) 441 ITR 722 (SC) has already directed the exclusion of the time period from 15.3.2020 to 28.2.2022 of the Covid-19 Pandemic for all limitation purposes. That being the case, I find the approach of learned CIT(A)/NFAC in refusing to condone the impugned delay as not sustainable in law. Ordered accordingly.
The assessee’s instant appeal is restored back to CIT(A)/NFAC for its afresh appropriate adjudication preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing subject to rider that it shall be the assessee’s responsibility only to plead and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings.
Order pronounced in open court on 13.11.2024.