MUBIM BEGAN,ETAWAH vs. ITO, WARD 2(2)(5), ETAWAH, ETAWAH
Facts
The assessee filed a second appeal with a delay of approximately 26 days against an order dated 20.02.2025, which had dismissed their first appeal as time-barred. The delay was attributed to the previous accountant's departure and the consultant's late discovery of the order.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the second appeal, noting that substantial justice should not be denied on technical grounds. The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(Appeals) with a direction to decide it afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the first appeal before the CIT(Appeals) should be condoned and the matter decided on merits.
Sections Cited
250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE :SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.273/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17
Mubim Began, 68, Hui Ganj, Vs. Income-tax Officer, Pachraha, Akalganj, Etawah Ward 2(2)(5), Etawah. (UP). PAN : CEOPB3624K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Sushil Maheshwari, CA Department by Sh. Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Date of hearing 16.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 30.07.2025
ORDER PER: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 20.02.2025 passed in Appeal No. NFAC/2015-16/10137833 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s appeal as barred by limitation.
ITA No.273/Agr/2025
At the very outset, we notice that the assessee filed this second
appeal on 17.05.2025 against the impugned order dated 20.02.2025 by
a delay of about 26 days. The reasons mentioned in the delay
condonation application filed by assessee are that the impugned order
was uploaded on Income-tax Portal and the email Id registered at the
said portal was that of assessee’s previous accountant, who left the job.
The assessee was advised to file an appeal by his consultant, who
came to know about the impugned order on login to Income Tax Portal
on 07.05.2025. Owing to this reason the appeal could not be filed within
the stipulated period of limitation. Prayed to condone the delay.
Considering the aforesaid reasons, given in the delay condonation
application and in the interest of justice, we deem it just and proper to
condone the said delay in filing this appeal. The delay is accordingly
condoned.
The aforesaid appeal has been filed on the ground, in addition to
many other grounds, that impugned order has been passed ex parte
without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Perused the records and heard learned representative of the
assessee and learned departmental representative.
It transpires from the perusal of records that the assessee filed first
appeal before the first appellate authority on 04.05.2022 against the 2 | P a g e
ITA No.273/Agr/2025
assessment order dated 25.03.2022. The assessee neither filed any
delay condonation application nor gave any reason for delay in response
to the letter dated 08.02.2025 issued by ld. CIT(Appeals). Ld.
CIT(Appeals), therefore, dismissed the appeal as non-maintainable. It is
well established principle of law that the substantial justice cannot be
denied on technical aberrations. The object of prescribing procedure is
to advance the cause of justice. In an adversial justice system like ours,
no party should ordinarily be denied the opportunity of participating in
the process of justice dispensation. Justice is the goal of jurisprudence.
Any interpretation which eludes or frustrates the recipient of justice, is
not to be followed. The object of prescribing the time period for filing of
the appeal is to expedite the proceedings before the concerned
authorities and to advance the cause of justice. We, therefore, deem it
just and proper to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to file
delay condonation application before the ld. CIT(Appeals), assigning the
reasons for delay, if any, in filing the first appeal.
In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed. The impugned
order is set aside. We restore the matter back to the file of learned
CIT(Appeals) with the direction to decide the matter afresh after
affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall
file delay condonation application before ld. CIT(Appeals), giving 3 | P a g e
ITA No.273/Agr/2025
reasons for delay, if any. Needless to say that the first appellate
authority shall ensure the substantial compliance of the principles of
natural justice.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30.07.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 30.07.2025 *aks/-
