RAVINDRA AWASTHI,INDORE vs. ITO 2(1), INDORE
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 13.09.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 05.12.2017 passed by learned ITO-2(1), Indore [“AO”] u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2010-11, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).
Page 1 of 6
Ravindra Awasthi ITA No. 191/Ind/2025 - AY 2010-11 2. The registry has informed that the present appeal is delayed by 412
days and therefore time-barred. The assessee has filed an application/
affidavit for condonation of delay; the same is scanned and re-produced for
an immediate reference:
Page 2 of 6
Ravindra Awasthi ITA No. 191/Ind/2025 - AY 2010-11
The averments made by assessee in above affidavit, which are self-
explanatory and which do not require repetition, were discussed and the Ld.
DR for revenue does not have any objection if the bench condones delay and
accordingly left it to the wisdom of bench. We have considered the
explanation advanced by assessee and in absence of any contrary fact or
material on record, the assessee is found to have a “sufficient cause” for
delay in filing present appeal. We find that section 253(5) of the Act
Page 3 of 6
Ravindra Awasthi ITA No. 191/Ind/2025 - AY 2010-11 empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if
there is a “sufficient cause” for not presenting appeal within prescribed time.
It is also a settled position by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land
Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387
that whenever substantial justice and technical considerations are opposed
to each other, the cause of substantial justice must be preferred by adopting
a justice-oriented approach. Thus, taking into account the facts of case, the
provision of section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we
take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with
hearing.
Ld. AR for assessee submits that the section 250(6) of the Income-tax
Act, 1961 provides “The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the
appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the
decision thereon and the reason for the decision.”. He further submits that in
present case, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s first appeal although
due to non-prosecution by assessee on the dates of hearing but still without
complying with the mandate of section 250(6). Therefore, the impugned first
appeal-order passed by Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside.
Ld. AR further submits that the assessment-order passed by AO is
also ex-parte u/s 144, therefore it would be fit to restore this appeal at the
level of AO for a fresh adjudication. Ld. AR acknowledges that the assessee
is ready and willing to make a proper representation before AO if an
Page 4 of 6
Ravindra Awasthi ITA No. 191/Ind/2025 - AY 2010-11 opportunity is given and hence prays that the present matter should be
remanded to AO.
Ld. DR for revenue agreed to the submission and prayer of Ld. AR but
made a request to direct the assessee to represent his case before AO and do
not seek unnecessary adjournments.
In view of above, having regard to the principle of natural justice and
also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be caused to revenue if the
present matter is restored at the level of AO, we remand this matter back to
the file of AO for adjudication afresh. However, in order to offset the
revenue’s efforts, we impose a cost of Rs. 2,500/- to be paid by
assessee to “Prime Minister National Relief Fund”. The assessee shall
submit a proof of such payment to AO during proceedings. This
payment of cost shall be a pre-condition for assessee to avail the
benefit of fresh adjudication from AO. The AO shall give necessary
opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order
uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain
vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by AO and
do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the AO shall be at
liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Ordered
accordingly.
Page 5 of 6
Ravindra Awasthi ITA No. 191/Ind/2025 - AY 2010-11 8. Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose, subject
to payment of cost by assessee as mentioned above.
Order pronounced in open court on 22/01/2026
Sd/- Sd/-
(PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Indore
िदनांक/Dated : 22/01/2026
Patel/Sr. PS
Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYSr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Page 6 of 6
