Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 205 days against the order dated 11.08.2023 passed by the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee's counsel argued that the delay is condonable based on Supreme Court decisions. The Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal in default without deciding on merits, despite issuing notices which were not complied with by the assessee.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged the delay but admitted the appeal for adjudication, citing Supreme Court precedents regarding condonation of delay. The Tribunal found that the Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without a reasoned decision, which violates Section 250(6) of the Act.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in default without a reasoned order, and if the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Sections Cited
143(3), 144B, 24(b), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against order dated 11.08.2023 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – 54 [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2019- 20, raising following grounds:
The learned CIT (A) has erred in law and in fact in not holding that the AO has erred in passing Assessment order
Pragna Kirti Kedia 2 ITA No. 2861/MUM/2024
u/s 143(3) rws 144B of the Act which is bad in law, illegal u/s 143(3) rws 144B of the Act which is bad in law, illegal u/s 143(3) rws 144B of the Act which is bad in law, illegal and null and void. and null and void. 2. The learned CIT(A) has The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in not erred in law and in fact in not holding that the AO erred in passing the assessment order holding that the AO erred in passing the assessment order holding that the AO erred in passing the assessment order in gross violation of principles of natural justice. in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 3. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in confirming the disallowance of deduction claimed of confirming the disallowance of deduction claimed of confirming the disallowance of deduction claimed of Municipal Municipal Tax Rs. 42,97,639/- under the head Income from under the head Income from House Property. House Property. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in confirming the disallowance of Interest claimed on borrowed confirming the disallowance of Interest claimed on borrowed confirming the disallowance of Interest claimed on borrowed funds u/s. 24(b) of the Act Rs. 3,03,63,959/ funds u/s. 24(b) of the Act Rs. 3,03,63,959/- under the under the head Income from House Pro head Income from House Property. 5. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in confirming the addition entire rent of Rs.9,00,000/ confirming the addition entire rent of Rs.9,00,000/- without giving the 2/3 deduction of another two persons under the giving the 2/3 deduction of another two persons under the giving the 2/3 deduction of another two persons under the head Income from House Property. head Income from House Property. 6. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fac The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fac The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in confirming the disallowance of House Property Loss of Rs. confirming the disallowance of House Property Loss of Rs. confirming the disallowance of House Property Loss of Rs. 2,81,15,463/ 2,81,15,463/-• 7. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact in confirming Rs. 2,00,000/ confirming Rs. 2,00,000/- of House property Loss set off of House property Loss set off against other head of Income. against other head of Income. 2. At the outset, the Ld. counsel for th At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that e assessee submitted that Registry has pointed out a delay of 205 days in filing the appeal. Registry has pointed out a delay of 205 days in filing the appeal. Registry has pointed out a delay of 205 days in filing the appeal. The Ld. counsel submitted that the impugned assessment order has The Ld. counsel submitted that the impugned assessment order has The Ld. counsel submitted that the impugned assessment order has been passed by the, the Ld. Assessing Officer on 29.09.2021 and been passed by the, the Ld. Assessing Officer on 29.09.2021 and been passed by the, the Ld. Assessing Officer on 29.09.2021 and therefore, in normal circumstances therefore, in normal circumstances the appeal was due before the the appeal was due before the Tribunal within 60 days from the date of impugned final Tribunal within 60 days from the date of impugned final Tribunal within 60 days from the date of impugned final assessment order. But this appeal has been filed on 11.08.2023. assessment order. But this appeal has been filed on 11.08.2023. assessment order. But this appeal has been filed on 11.08.2023. The Ld. counsel submitted that delay in filing this appeal is covered The Ld. counsel submitted that delay in filing this appeal is covered The Ld. counsel submitted that delay in filing this appeal is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (167 ITR 471) and in the Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (167 ITR 471) Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (167 ITR 471) case of N. Balakrishna v. M. Ramamurthy [1998] 7 SCC 123 N. Balakrishna v. M. Ramamurthy [1998] 7 SCC 123. N. Balakrishna v. M. Ramamurthy [1998] 7 SCC 123 Accordingly, he submitted that appeal might be treated as within Accordingly, he submitted that appeal might be treated as within Accordingly, he submitted that appeal might be treated as within the limitation period in view of the d the limitation period in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme ecision of the Hon’ble Supreme
Pragna Kirti Kedia 3 ITA No. 2861/MUM/2024
Court (supra). The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) did not Court (supra). The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) did not Court (supra). The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) did not object for admitting the appeal for adjudication. In view of the object for admitting the appeal for adjudication. In view of the object for admitting the appeal for adjudication. In view of the above, we are admitting the appeal for adjudication being within the above, we are admitting the appeal for adjudication being within the above, we are admitting the appeal for adjudication being within the limitation period in view o limitation period in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme f the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court (supra).
At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that ex-parte qua the this appeal has been decided by the Ld. CIT(A) this appeal has been decided by the Ld. CIT(A) ex assessee without deciding the issue on merit and therefore, this assessee without deciding the issue on merit and therefore, this assessee without deciding the issue on merit and therefore, this appeal might be set aside for deciding afresh. might be set aside for deciding afresh.
We have heard rival submission of the parties and perused the We have heard rival submission of the parties and perused the We have heard rival submission of the parties and perused the relevant material on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) issued relevant material on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) issued relevant material on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) issued various notices for hearing however, same were not complied by the various notices for hearing however, same were not complied by the various notices for hearing however, same were not complied by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) thereafter dismissed the appeal in default IT(A) thereafter dismissed the appeal in default IT(A) thereafter dismissed the appeal in default without considering the issue on merit. In our opinion, under the without considering the issue on merit. In our opinion, under the without considering the issue on merit. In our opinion, under the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act, the Ld. CIT(A) is required to provisions of section 250(6) of the Act, the Ld. CIT(A) is required to provisions of section 250(6) of the Act, the Ld. CIT(A) is required to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the grounds raised by the pass a reasoned and speaking order on the grounds raised by the pass a reasoned and speaking order on the grounds raised by the assessee even in absence of any submission on behalf of the ee even in absence of any submission on behalf of the ee even in absence of any submission on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, we feel it appropriate to set aside the order of assessee. Therefore, we feel it appropriate to set aside the order of assessee. Therefore, we feel it appropriate to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to him for deciding the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to him for deciding the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to him for deciding afresh and pass a reasoned and speaking order on the grounds afresh and pass a reasoned and speaking order on the grounds afresh and pass a reasoned and speaking order on the grounds raised by the assessee. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are y the assessee. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are y the assessee. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
Pragna Kirti Kedia 4 ITA No. 2861/MUM/2024
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on nounced in the open Court on 22/10/2024. /10/2024.
Sd/ Sd/- Sd/ Sd/- (SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL SINGH KARHAIL) (OM PRAKASH KANT OM PRAKASH KANT) JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 22/10/2024 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai ITAT, Mumbai