Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an intimation under section 143(1)(a) which resulted in disallowances of Rs. 15,16,62,920. The first appellate authority dismissed the appeal stating it was filed beyond the time limit. The assessee's counsel explained that the delay was due to difficulty in downloading the intimation from the CPC.
Held
The Tribunal found that the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was bona fide due to technical difficulties in downloading the order. Therefore, the delay was condoned, and the case was restored to the file of the first appellate authority for deciding the appeal on its merit.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiable, and if so, whether the appeal should be decided on merits.
Sections Cited
143(1)(a), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH ‘E’, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON’BLE & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, HON’BLE
The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.04.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), ADDL/JCIT (A)-1, Jaipur for Assessment Year 2022-23.
2 The CPC has issued an intimation u/s 143(1)(a) after making various disallowances to the amount of Rs. 15,16,62,920/-. The assessee has filed appeal against intimation u/s 143(1) dated 01.11.2023 issued by the CPC, Bangalore however, the ld. Addl. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee stating that appeal was filed beyond time limit of more than 3 months. During the course of appellate proceedings before us, the ld. Counsel submitted that intimation u/s 143(1) of the Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd. A.Y. 2022-23 Act could not be downloaded timely, therefore, there was delay in filling the appeal of the assessee. The ld. Counsel further submitted that more opportunity be provided at the level of first appellate authority for deciding the cases of the assessee on merit.
Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. Without reiterating the fact as discussed supra in this order, the ld. Addl. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the appeal filed by the assessee on merit but the same was dismissed on account of delay in filing the appeal against intimation u/s 143(1) issued by the CPC.
After considering submission of the ld. Counsel, it appeared that there is a bona fide reason for delay in filing the impugned appeal by about 90 days before the ld. CIT(A) because of difficulty in downloading the order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act as discussed supra in this order. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the first appellate authority. In the light of the above facts and circumstances to decide the appeal of the assessee on merit as contemplate u/s 250(6) of the Act we restore this case to the file of the first appellate authority for deciding on merit after taking into consideration the relevant supporting material to be furnished by the assessee in the set aside proceedings. Needless to say that adequate opportunity of hearing be provided to the assessee. The assessee is directed to make the
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 29.08.2024