Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal which was delayed by 188 days due to technical glitches while re-filing a form. The CIT(E) had decided the assessee's earlier appeal ex parte without considering submissions and documents furnished.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal after being satisfied that there was a reasonable cause. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(E) decided the appeal ex parte and directed the CIT(E) to provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal deserves to be condoned and whether the CIT(E) erred in deciding the appeal ex parte.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KSHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
PER SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the CIT(E), Bangalore on 22/05/2023 in DIN No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2023-24/1053050788(1).
At the outset, we note that the appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by 188 days. In this regard, the assessee filed Affidavit dated 25/01/2024 stating the reason that the appeal should have been filed by 20/07/2023, however, the appeal was filed on 25/01/2024 because the assessee was initially advised to re-file the Form which was not done due to technical glitches. The appellant tried to address the technical issues by approaching various authorities and the same did not yield any results. Since the alternative remedy was not possible, the appellant deemed to file an appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal, hence, it got delayed.
We have heard the rival submission of both the parties and after perusing of the materials placed before us we are satisfied that the delay in filing the appeal was due to reasonable and sufficient cause and the delay in filing the appeal deserves to be condoned. We accordingly condone the delay in filing the appeal after relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST. Katiji and Others (198) 167 ITR 471.
At the very outset, we noticed that the appeal of the assessee before the CIT(E) has been decided ex parte. The reason for deciding the appeal by the CIT(E) ex parte was that several notices issued from the Office of the CIT(E) for filing written submissions/documents but as per the CIT (E) those notices were not complied by the assessee.
The ld.AR of the assessee submitted that the CIT(E) has not considered the submissions made on 22/05/2023 and passed order on 22/05/2023 without considering documents furnished by the assessee. He has also filed a paper book containing page No. 01 to 39 which is placed on record.
6. The ld. DR relied on the order of the CIT (E) and submitted that the ample oppourtunities were granted but the assessee did not comply.
After considering the rival submissions, we note that since assessee has reason for not complying the notices, considering the request made by the ld.AR of the assessee and in the interest of justice, we are remitting the issue back to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh consideration. The CIT(E) is directed to give reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue as per law. The assessee is directed to produce the necessary documents for substantiating its case and to avoid unnecessary adjournments for early disposal of the case and update the email, mobile No. and address for communication.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in court on 4th day of April, 2024.