Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee challenged an order u/s 154A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the CIT(A) with a delay of 514 days. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to the delay. The assessee's reason for the delay was related to waiting for a corrected order on a demand after accepting a partial addition and depositing the due tax.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 514 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) by imposing a cost of Rs. 1000/-. The matter was remanded to the CIT(A) to decide the appeal afresh on its merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on delay without condoning it, and whether the delay of 514 days was sufficiently explained.
Sections Cited
154A, 154
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld.
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 16/01/2025 for the Assessment Year 2021-22.
Brief facts of the case are that, an order u/s 154A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) came to be passed on 29/07/2022 which has been challenged by the Assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 514 days. The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 16/01/2025 dismissed the 16/01/2025, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.
The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has erroneously dismissed the Appeal without condoning the delay in latches in filing the first appeal and the order impugned is against principals of natural justice.
The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that there was no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay of 514 days in filing the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Ld. CIT(A)
has rightly dismissed the first appeal of the Assessee in delay in latches, thus, sought for dismissal of the present Appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Aggrieved by the order passed u/s 154 of the Act dated29/07/2022, the Assessee preferred Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)
with a delay of 514 days. The Assessee in his application for condonation of delay filed before the Ld. CIT(A) assigned following reason:-
‘we had accepted addition for Rs. 36190/- and had deposited due tax on it along with disapproving the demand on balance addition for Rs.
1617447.00. We were waiting for a fresh order, which never came against and waiting for the correction neither the rectification of the mistake appearance from the ITR was done, nor any other intimation. It was only when the Assessee received the notice from the local ITO, that he realized that his plea for correction of the demand was not given heed to. Hence the delay. The Assessee is extremely sorry for the same, and pleads to condone the delay.”
However, the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay and dismissed the Appeal.
It is expected from the Assessee to file the Appeal on time, if the cause for delay is bona- fide and beyond the control of the Assessee, the same can be construed as sufficient cause. The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the Appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay.
In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst.
Katiji& Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that the delay when supported by justifiable reasons, must make way for the cause of substantial justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 514 days in filing the first Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) by imposing the cost of Rs.
1000/- which shall be deposited by the Assessee in Prime Minister the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.
In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13th August, 2025 Sd/- Sd/-
(MANISH AGARWAL) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 13.08.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTR ITAT, NEW DELHI