Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal manually within the time limit. Subsequently, an e-appeal was filed in compliance with a CBDT notification, which led to a delay. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as time-barred without condoning the delay, despite the assessee filing the appeal manually within the stipulated period.
Held
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal as time-barred without considering the reasons for the delay. The ITAT noted that the assessee had filed the appeal manually within time and was unaware of the e-filing procedure initially. The Tribunal condoned the delay.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal was time-barred due to a procedural delay in e-filing, and if the delay should be condoned.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH AGRA
Before: SH. RAMIT KOCHAR & SH. SUDHIR KUMAR
ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as “NFAC”] vide order dated 24.03.2022 pertaining to Assessment Year 2013-14 pertaining to arises out of the assessment order dated 11-03-2016 under section 143(3) of the Income- Tax Act 1961[hereinafter referred as ‘the Act.
An adjournment application moved on behalf of the assessee to adjourn the case, no ground to adjourn the case hence, the application is rejected. The bench decided to proceed to decide the issue with the assistance of ld. D.R.
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
“1. because CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal as time bared without providing opportunity to explain the delay and over looked the contents of delay condonation application filed with the E-Appeal
2.Because the CIT (A) could not under stood the reason of delay mentioned either in the form-35 (Appeal Memo) or in delay condonation application
3.because the CIT (A) has not considered the appeal filed on 18.04.2016 at ASK counter of the Income Tax
Department
Because filing of appeal in hard copy accepted at ASK
and such filing was neither objected, nor any suggestion for E-Filing of appeal was made known
5. Because the E-Filing Appeal procedure was not in the knowledge of either ASK or clerk of advocate. This was genuine and bonafide belief of proper procedure of appeal
filing in hard copy.
6.Because the CIT (A) has erred and did not consider the appeal on 18.04.2016 in calculating the delay of 467 days for dismissing the appeal treating inordinate delay.
because the procedural mistake resulting in late e-filing
of appeal is not good ground for dismissal of appeal as time bared
8 Because there was no malafide or intentional delay in late e-filing of appeal and delay should have been condoned with liberal view.
because the process of e-filing of appeal was newly
introduced and there was possibility of mistake to follow e-filing procedure of appeal. The present appeal was late without malafide intention immediately when the mistake came to the knowledge
Because CIT (A) has curtailed the right of hearing of appeal on merits by dismissing it on preliminary ground of inordinate delay though there is reasonable and bonafide
reason of it. The CIT (A) further erred is not allowing opportunity to explain so called delay in so called delay.
Because the order of the CIT (A) is BAD and illegal
both on facts and under the law. The present Appeal may be heard on merits by this Hon'ble Court.”
4. At the outset, the assessee has stated that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal by stating that the appeal is time barred.
He has further stated that the assessee has filed the appeal manually before the CIT(A) within time and the receipt of filing was provided to the assessee. He also submitted that assessee was unaware about the filing of appeal electronically. The assessee has filed the e-appeal in the compliance of CBDT notification no.AO 637(E) (No.11/2016 F.No. 149/150/2015- TPL). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay. The assessee has stated that assessee be given one more opportunity of being heard on merits.
The Ld. DR vehemently relied upon the orders of the authorities below. The ld. DR has stated that no plausible explanation has been given by the assessee for condonation of the delay.
We have heard rival arguments and perused the material available on record. In the present case assessee has filed the appeal manually within time which shows that assessee wants to avail the legal remedy. Later on appeal has been filed on e- portal in the compliance of CBDT notification no. AO637(E) (NO.
11/2016 F.No. 149/150/2015-TPL) and that was the reason for delay in filing appeal. Ld CIT (A) has not considered this point and rejected the appeal as barred by limitation. When the assessee has filed the appeal manually then it was the duty of the department to inform the assessee that the appeal can be filed only e-filing and the department should not accept the hard copy of the appeal manually. Assessee has shown sufficient ground for filing the appeal for delay. Ld CIT(A) should have condoned the delay in filing appeal and should have decided appeal on merit. Hence, we condone the delay in filing appeal and admit it for adjudication. Therefore, we deem fit it to send the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same on merit in accordance with law after providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate in the assessment proceedings. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and therefore, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 07.02.2025.