Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeals were filed against orders of the CIT(A) which dismissed the assessees' appeals in limine without adjudicating on merits due to a delay in filing. The assessees had not filed delay condonation applications before the CIT(A) and claimed not to have received defect notices regarding the delay.
Held
The Tribunal found that the assessees had sufficient cause for the belated filing of appeals before the CIT(A) and condoned the delay. The Tribunal also noted that there was no record of defect notices being issued by the CIT(A) regarding the delay. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal provided the assessees with another opportunity.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeals in limine without condoning the delay, and whether the assessees were given adequate opportunity to explain the delay.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & MS. PADMAVATHI. S
Appellant Respondent Assessment Years 1686, 1687/Bang/2024 Shri. Mogali Vijaykumar Srikanth, The Income Tax Officer, 54, Vijayalakshmi Nivas, Sajjan Central Circle -1(3), 2013-14, 2015-16 Rao Road, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 018. PAN : ARMPS 5351 F 1688, 1689/Bang/2024 Smt. Mogali Srikanth Bharathi, -do- 54, Vijayalakshmi Nivas, Sajjan 2013-14, 2014-15 Rao Road, Bangalore – 560 018. PAN : AGSPB 4655 J Appellant by : Ms. Lakshmi, Advocate Respondent by : Smt. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 15.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 15.10.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : These appeals at the instance of the two assessees are directed against two Orders of CIT(A) both dated 22.04.2024, passed under section 250 of the Act. The relevant Assessment Years are 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16.
There is a delay of 73 days in filing these appeals before the Tribunal. Assessees have filed application for condonation of delay along with affidavit stating therein the reasons for the belated filing of these appeals. On perusal of the reasons stated for late filing of the appeals, we are of the view that no latches can be attributed to the assessees as there is sufficient cause for belated filing of these appeals. Hence, we condone the delay and proceed to dispose off the matter on merits.
Since common issues are raised in these appeals, these appeals were heard together and are disposed off by this consolidated Order.
At the very outset, we notice that CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assessees in limine without adjudicating on merits. The CIT(A) did not condone the delay of 160 days and 148 days in filing the appeals before him [for both the assessees, there were identical delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A)]. The CIT(A) has observed that in spite of notices issued, assessees have not appeared nor filed any written submissions [refer para 3.1 of the impugned Orders of the CIT(A)].
Learned AR submitted that assessees had not received any defect notices stating therein that there was a delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A). It was submitted that assessees had omitted to file the delay condonation application before the CIT(A). It is stated that CIT(A) has erred in not issuing defect notices intimating that appeals are filed belatedly and no delay condonation applications are filed. The assessees before the Tribunal have filed delay condonation applications explaining the delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A).
The learned DR was duly heard.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals of the assessees in limine without adjudicating the issues on merits. The assessees did not appear before the CIT(A) nor did they file their written submissions. Assessees also omitted to file delay condonation applications before the CIT(A). We notice from the Orders of the CIT(A) that only two hearing notices were issued from the Office of the First Appellate Authority (FAA). There is nothing on record to show that defect notices were issued from the Office of the CIT(A) intimating the assessees that appeals have been filed belatedly and no condonation applications have been filed. In the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that assessees should be provided with one more opportunity to explain the delay in filing the appeals before the FAA. The affidavit filed by assessees stating the reasons for belated filing of the appeals before the FAA shall be taken on record by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) shall pass fresh Orders on the delay condonation application and shall take a decision in accordance with law. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes.
Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.