The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay in filing. The assessee claimed they did not receive notice from the CIT(A)'s office, leading to the delay. The assessee sought condonation of the delay and an opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned and if the assessee should be given a final opportunity to present their case.

Skoda India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2017

Q: What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to give one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. The assessee was also directed not to seek any adjournment.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20th January, 2017 of the CIT(A)-XXII, New Delhi relating to assessment year 2012-13. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under :- “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in law while upholding the unjustified, unlawful and unwarranted addition of Rs. 28,00,000/- on account of unsecured loan from M/s Sonata Construction Pvt Ltd. Detailed submissions in this regard are annexed with this Form.

2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in law while upholding the unjustified, unlawful and unwarranted in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal to CIT-A-22 in spite of sufficient provided to him.

3. The Company had filed an appeal to CIT (A)-22 along with an application for condoning the delay in filing the appeal within prescribed time limit. Appellant Company had given sufficient cause of such delay which was purely on account of negligence of Appellant Company's authorized representative {copy of the application furnished to CIT (Appeals) is annexed once again with Form 36}. Since learned CIT has not condoned the delay, Appellant Company approaches this Hon'ble forum for condonation of delay and admission of appeal.”

The ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the very outset, submitted that since notice from the office of the CIT(A) was not received by the assessee, therefore, there was no compliance before him. He submitted that in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored to the file of CIT(A) with a direction to give an opportunity to the assessee to explain the delay in filing of the appeal and substantiate its case.

The ld. DR while opposing the arguments of the ld. Counsel for the assessee, however, submitted that he has no objection if the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to the assessee to appear before him and not to seek any adjournment.

After hearing the rival arguments made by both the sides and considering the totality of the facts of the case, I , in the interest of justice deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to give one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. The assessee is also hereby directed not to seek any adjournment and appear before the CIT(A) to substantiate its case. The ld. CIT(A) shall decide the issue as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

SKODA INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 23(4), NEW DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments