REKHA,ROHTAK vs. ITO, WARD - 5, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2895/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 October 2024AY 2017-18Bench: MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

To prevent a miscarriage of justice, the Tribunal granted the assessee another opportunity to explain the significant delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) to reconsider the condonation of delay and pass a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte assessment order passed under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2017-18, which was upheld by the CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre. The appeal before the CIT(A) itself was barred by limitation for 1179 days, for which the assessee's explanation of personal problems and ill-health was not accepted, and the delay was not condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether the long delay in filing an appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned, given the ex-parte nature of the assessment and first appellate orders.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, DELHI

Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY

Hearing: 28.10.2024Pronounced: 30.10.2024
1.

The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.05.2024 passed by the CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the Assessment order dated 16.11.2019 passed by the ITO, Ward-5, Rohtak, Under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

The application seeking adjournment has been rejected.

3.

Heard the parties and perused the records as it appears from the record that since the assessee neither appeared before the Ld. CIT(A) nor before the ld. A.O both the orders were passed ex-parte. Further that the appeal filed before the Ld. CIT(A) is barred by limitation for 1179 days the reason whereof though restricted to personal family problem and ill-health, no proper explanation has been rendered by the assessee and the delay has not been condoned by the Ld. CIT(A).

4.

In that view of the matter, it is found fit and proper to grant a further opportunity to the assessee to explain such delay before the Ld. CIT(A) in order to prevent miscarriage of justice. With the aforesaid observation the issue, is, thus, remitted to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to consider the issue of condonation of delay afresh explanation whereof is directed to be filed by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) is further directed to proceed with the matter and to pass a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law.

5.

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →