Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order dated 08.08.2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18. The appeal was filed with a delay of 247 days, and the assessee submitted a petition for condonation of delay with bonafide reasons.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay and admitted the appeal. The adjournment application was rejected, and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The assessee was granted liberty to file evidence in support of their claim.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned and whether the case should be remanded for fresh consideration after the ex-parte assessment and dismissal by the lower authorities.
Sections Cited
144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunatha
Year: 2017-18 Prabakaran Darwin, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, Panchayat Shopping Non Corporate Ward – 22(1), Complex, Velachery Main Road, Room No. 1, Tambaram (Business Range), 1st & 2nd Floor, Ramakrishna Kamarajapuram, Chennai 600 073. Street, West Tambaram, [PAN: AMYPD6679C] Chennai 600 045. (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Y. Sridhar, F.C.A. ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 05.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 11.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.08.2023 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18.
We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 247 days. The assessee filed petition for condonation of delay stating reasons for the said delay. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the affidavit, we find that the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time and accordingly, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.
The ld. AR Shri Y. Shridhar, F.C.A. filed an adjournment application seeking time to collect details from the assessee. The ld. DR Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT submits that it is a simple issue and could be remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer. She drew our attention to the assessment order as well as the order of the ld. CIT(A) and submits that the assessee could not make any submissions before both the authorities below and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) exparte of the assessee. Therefore, considering the same being a simple issue, we reject the adjournment application and proceed to hear the matter.
At the outset, as rightly pointed out by the ld. DR, we note that the assessment order was completed exparte of the assessee as it is clear from para 4, 6 and 7 of the assessment order, wherein, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete best judgement assessment under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] in the absence of cooperation from the assessee. On perusal of the impugned order, as rightly pointed out by the ld. DR, it is clear from para 5 that the ld. CIT(A)/ NFAC issued six notices in response to which, no compliance was made by the assessee. Further, on perusal of para 6.3, 6.4 & 6.4.3, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee for want of evidence. Therefore, taking into consideration the submissions of the ld. DR and in the interest of natural justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of his claim. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 11th September, 2024 at Chennai.