Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) which was dismissed on the grounds of limitation, with a delay of 375 days. The assessee attributed the delay to suffering from Hepatitis and submitted a medical certificate.
Held
The CIT(A) did not condone the delay, stating that the medical certificate had discrepancies and was not authentic. However, the CIT(A) and the Revenue's DR could not specify these discrepancies. The Tribunal found that the medical certificate clearly indicated the assessee was suffering from Hepatitis around the time of the delay.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned due to the assessee's medical condition.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH(SMC
Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY
Assessee represented by Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv. Department represented by Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr.DR Date of hearing 06/01/2025 Date of pronouncement 05/02/2025 O R D E R PER: PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal/Addl/JCIT(A), Bhubaneswar [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 22/07/2024 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 as per the grounds of appeal on record.
2. In this case, the ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 22/07/2024 had dismissed the appeal of assessee in limine on the ground of limitation. There was a delay of 375 days as per Form-35 and the assessee had explained the delay in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A) furnishing a medical certificate wherein it is stated that the assessee was suffering from Hepatitis. The ld. CIT(A) has not condoned this delay by stating that, though the assessee had submitted a medical certificate, however, it contains "many discrepancies" which suggests that the document is not authentic and has been prepared as an afterthought. However, in the entire order of ld. CIT(A), he has not brought out the reasons Ved Prakash Dubey Vs ITO of such discrepancies and what exactly were those discrepancies in the medical certificate given by the registered practitioner which is on record. That even the ld. Sr.DR for the revenue could not refute the fact that the assessee had furnished doctor's certificate wherein it has been clearly stated that the assessee was suffering from hepatitis during that time i.e. around 15/12/2017. The order of assessment was passed on 29/11/2017. The appeal before the ld. CIT(A) was to be filed on 28/12/2017 but from 15/12/2017 itself, the assessee was diagnosed with hepatitis as per the medical certificate filed. That as examined, neither the ld. CIT(A) nor the ld. Sr.DR could examine what were the discrepancies found in the medical certificate. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the delay of 375 days in filing appeal before the First Appellate Authority is hereby condoned and the matter is remanded back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication as per law complying with the principles of natural justice. The assessee is also directed to file written submission and documentary evidences and represent his case on merits before the ld. CIT(A). As per above terms, the grounds of appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes.