Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 261 days. The CIT(A) rejected the appeal in limine without condoning the delay, as the assessee failed to provide reasons for the delay despite opportunities.
Held
The Tribunal held that the principles of natural justice require giving the assessee an opportunity to present their case on merits, especially when the delay is not deliberate or mala fide. Substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned and the matter restored for adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DIVISION BENCH, JODHPUR HEARING THROUGH: VIRTUAL MODE BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, AM ITA No. 725 /Jodh/ 2024 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Manohar Singh Vs. The ACIT/DCIT C/o Rajendra Jain Advocate, Circle, Barmer 106, Akshay Deep Complex, 5th B Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur PAN NO: BIQPS5344J Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Rajendra Jain, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT(Sr. D.R) Date of Hearing : 21/05/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 02/06/2025 आदेश/Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M: This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 04.09.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT, Appeal, Addl/JCIT (A)-1 Chandigarh, rejecting the appeal in limine on the ground of delay of 261 days in filing the appeal before him and thereby refusing to condone the delay under section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed on 14.12.2017 by the Ld. AO. The assessee filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) on 04.10.2018, resulting in a delay of 261 days. The assessee had indicated in Form No. 35 that the grounds for condonation of delay would be submitted at the time of hearing. However, as noted by the Ld. CIT(A), no such submission was made despite multiple opportunities. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in limine by the Ld. CIT(A) without adjudicating the matter on merits.
Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the delay in filing the appeal was unintentional and caused due to reasonable circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. It was prayed that the delay be condoned and the matter be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
2
The Ld. DR relied on the order of the learned CIT(A).
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. In our considered view, the principles of natural justice warrant that the assessee should be given an opportunity to present his case on merits, particularly where the delay, though substantial, is not shown to be deliberate or mala fide. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) has held that substantial justice deserves to prevail over technical considerations.
Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, we hereby condone the delay of 261 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and set aside the impugned order dated 04.09.2024. The matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merits, after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open Court on 02/06/2025) (DR. MITHA LAL MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER AG Copy of the order forwarded to :
The Appellant
The Respondent
CIT
The CIT(A)
DR, ITAT, JODHPUR
Guard File
आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/