M/S R P SINGH & CO,RANCHI vs. DCIT / ACIT, CIRCLE -1, RANCHI, RANCHI

Shri Devesh Poddar, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri R.C. Marndi, Sr.DR appeared for the revenue.

The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) had passed impugned order ex parte on 20/07/2023 and this appeal was filed before this Tribunal on 12/03/2025 which causes delay of 529 days in filing this appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee fairly accepted that no condonation petition was filed by the assessee. It was a submission that the delay was caused due to situation beyond the control of assessee. There was no deliberate or intentional delay in filing this appeal. The ld. AR prayed that the delay may be condoned.

In reply, the ld. Sr. DR did not raise any serious objection.

We have considered the submissions. When substantial justice is pitted against technicality such as limitation, it is always better to follow the principles of adjudicating in respect of the substantial justice. By not condoning the delay in filing of the appeals, considerable loss could be caused to the assessee but by condoning the delay and adjudicating on merits, the assessee would also know what is the mistakes that he has committed. This being so, we are of the view that the delay in filing of the appeal is liable to be condoned and we do so.

On merit, it was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution without giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Ld AR pleaded that if this Court grants the assessee one more opportunity by restoring this appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A), so that the assessee will be able to substantiate its case before the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, he prayed that the appeal be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A).

In reply, ld. Sr. Departmental Representative on the other hand, submitted that the ld. CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunities to the assessee, the assessee did not appear before the ld. CIT(A) and not furnished relevant details. He strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A).

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) clearly shows that the CIT(A) has granted several opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its case but the assessee failed to comply with the notices, ultimately, the orders passed by him is ex-parte order. Before us, ld AR undertakes that he will cooperate the proceedings and requested to restore the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice, the issues in the present case are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee subject to the payment of cost of Rs. 10,000/- deposited with Jharkhand Income Tax Bar Association to be paid within 60 days from the date of issue of this order. The assessee is also directed to cooperate in the set aside proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee is also directed to furnish all the documents with its possession before the ld. CIT(A) to substantiate its claim. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason.

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order announced in open court on 06/01/2026.