What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT accepted the assessee's explanation for the delay and set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on its merits after providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard.

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 12 days. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for being belated without providing a proper opportunity for the assessee to explain the delay. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for delay without adhering to principles of natural justice. Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Shri Biswanath Bid vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM ]

Shri Biswanath Bid (Deceased) -vs.- I.T.O., Ward-1 (2) Through L.R. and Son Shri Subrata Bid Asansol Durgapur. [PAN : AIUPB 0987 F] (Respondent) (Appellant) For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : None Date of Hearing : 31.01.2018. Date of Pronouncement : 02.02.2018. ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 26.02.2015 of CIT(A)- Asansol relating to A.Y.2009-10.

The Assessee is an individual. He carries on the business of acting as stockist of Government lottery tickets. For A.Y. 2009-10 the assessee filed return of income on 28.09.2009 disclosing total income of Rs.4,14,605/-. An order of assessment dated 13.12.2011 was passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) determining the total income of the assessee at a sum of Rs.15,58,174/-making the following additions :- “Returned Income Rs.4,14,605/- Add : 1) Commission (Para 4): 6,78,573/- 2) Interest Income (Para 5): 9,780/- 3)Commission Income (Para 6): 32,429/- 4)Undisclosed commissin Income(Para7) 1,720/- 5)DD Payment (Para 8): 5,21,032/- 6) Cash drawing (Para 9): 1,79,972/- 7)Undisclosed commission income (Para 10): 20,063/- Rs.14,43,569/- Assessed Income : Rs.18,58,174/-“

2 Shri Biswanath Bid A.Yr.2009-10 3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of assessment the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The appeal was filed on 31.10.2012. There was a delay of about 12 days in filing the appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) sent a letter dated 12.02.2012 to the assessee pointing out to the assesee that the appeal has been filed belatedly and is liable to be dismissed and called for an explanation from the assessee. It appears that the assesee did not send any reply to the aforesaid letter of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) therefore dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of CIT(A) the assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed written submissions. The ld. DR sought an adjournment on the ground of illness. I am of the view that since the order of CIT(A) is liable to be set aside for violation of principles of natural justice the request for an adjournment need not be acceded to.

In the written submission in ground no.1 it has been mentioned that the delay in filing the appeal was on acocunt of illness of the assesee. It has further been pointed out in the written submission that the CIT(A) heard the authorised representative of the assessee and obtained remand report from the AO on various grounds of appeal raised by the assessee before CIT(A). It has been pointed out that the CIT(A) was satisfied with the explanation for delay in filing the appeal but for reasons best known to him has chosen to dismiss the appeal on the ground that it has been filed belatedly. It has been prayed that the order of CIT(A) may be set aside and various issues raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal before CIT(A) should be decided on merits after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was also prayed that the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) should be condoned.

3 Shri Biswanath Bid A.Yr.2009-10 7. I have given a very careful considertion to the written submisisons and the material available on record. I accept the stand taken in the written submission on the condonation of dealy of 12 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before CIT(A)., I also set aside the order of CIT(A) and direct the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on vraious grounds raised by the assessee before him on merits after affording the assessee opportunity of being heard. For statistical purpose the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.

In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court 02.02.2018.

SHRI BISWANATH BID vs. ITO, WD-1(2), ASANSOL, ASANSOL

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments