Y-201 THICKANAMCODE PACCS LTD.,KANYAKUMARI vs. ITO, WARD-1, NAGERCOIL

At the outset, it is noted that this appeal has been filed before Tribunal belatedly and there is a delay of ‘22’ days. However, it has been brought to our notice that the assessee had filed the appeal within the limitation period through virtual mode (e-filing) and has also filed the hard copy of the same, which has been again numbered and posted for preferred against the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) (e-filing) has been numbered as ITA No.1309/Chny/2024. Therefore, this is duplicate filing of the same appeal and thus there is error in stating that there is delay of ‘22’ days in filing of this instant Appeal. We find that there is a duplicity in filing of the appeal against the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) dated 03.03.2024 and since, the assessee has undertaken to withdraw the appeal being listed on 24.07.2024, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal.

At the outset, the Ld.AR pointed out that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed ex parte order without condoning the delay in filing of the appeal before him i.e., the Ld.CIT(A). We find that the Ld.CIT(A) has not condoned the delay of ‘180’ days in filing of the appeal before him i.e. the Ld.CIT(A). It was brought to our notice that the assessee had filed condonation application before the Ld.CIT(A), wherein, the assessee has sated the reason for delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), wherein it was stated that the assessee had entrusted the assessment order and the related documents for AY 2020-21 to an Authorized Representative, who failed to file the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) since it [the file] got misplaced and which led to the delay in filing of the appeal. In such a scenario, we are of the opinion that the assessee shouldn’t be penalized for the omission on the part of the Ld.AR, who ought to have been careful while accepting the papers for filing the appeal on time. In any event, after going through the records and for the ends of justice and fair play, we condone the delay of ‘180’ days in filing of the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and since, the Ld.CIT(A) has not passed the order as per provisions of sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the grounds of appeal in accordance to law after hearing the assessee. Before us, the Ld.AR undertakes to diligently file written submissions along with relevant documents before the Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate the grounds of appeal raised before him. In the light of the aforesaid facts, the Ld.CIT(A) is directed to adjudicate the grounds of appeal in accordance to law after hearing the assessee.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Sd/- Sd/- (अिमताभ शु�ा) (एबी टी. वक�) (AMITABH SHUKLA) (ABY T. VARKEY) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �याियक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER