SAYAJI FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. CIRCLE 15(3)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

The present appeal is delayed by 49 days. Along with the present appeal, the assessee filed an application seeking condonation of the aforesaid delay which is duly supported by the affidavit of the Director of the assessee. In the said application, it has been submitted that the copy of the impugned order was received by the assessee on 09/06/2023 and therefore the appeal was required to be filed on or before 08/08/2023. However, the appeal was filed on 26/09/2023. As per the assessee, it is Director, Mr. Azhar Yusuf Dhanani, who was looking after the income tax-related matters was not in the

We find that the reasons stated by the assessee for seeking condonation of delay fall within the parameters for grant of condonation laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag Vs. MST Katiji and others: 1987 SCR (2) 387. It is well established that rules of procedure are handmaid of justice. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. In the present case, the assessee did not stand to benefit from the late filing of the appeal. In view of the above and having perused the application, we are of the considered view that there exists sufficient cause for not filing the present appeal within the limitation period and therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee.

In its appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds:–

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing sweets, farsan, and chats ingredients and marketing the products through chain of shops in India. For the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on 30/10/2018 declaring a loss of Rs. 15,41,36,693. The return filed by the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny and statutory notices under section 143(2) as well as section 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. During the assessment proceedings, from the audited accounts, it was observed that the assessee has debited Rs. 9,02,17,171 under the head “other expenses” in the profit and loss account. Further, it was observed that under the breakup for “other expenses” the asset written-off is reflected at Rs. 2,45,65,867. Page | 3

In the appeal before the learned CIT(A), despite notices being issued, no reply/submission was filed on behalf of the assessee. Accordingly, vide impugned ex–parte order dated 09/06/2023, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us.

We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. It is evident that the learned CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte due to the non-appearance of/on behalf of the assessee. Now in appeal before us, the assessee is duly represented by the learned Authorised Representative (“learned AR”) and wishes to pursue the litigation against the addition made by the AO. During the hearing, the learned AR submitted that the hearing notices were sent by the learned CIT(A) on the email ID of the consultant, who is a senior citizen and inadvertently did not check his email. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that in the interest of justice, the assessee be hereby granted one more opportunity to represent its case on merits before the learned CIT(A). Consequently, we deem it fit and proper to restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for de novo adjudication of the appeal on merits after consideration of all the details/submissions as may be filed by the assessee. Needless to mention no order shall be passed without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties. During the hearing, the learned AR undertook that the hearing notice issued on the email ID as mentioned in Form No.36, i.e. shrikant@transfurt.com, shall be complied with by the assessee. Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) is directed to issue the hearing notice(s) on the aforesaid email ID, unless at a subsequent stage, the Page | 4

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20/02/2024