BHUWNESHWAR SINGH MARAN,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1), BHOPAL

आदेश / O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 30.01.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 26.02.2015 passed by learned ITO- 1(1), Bhopal [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2007-08, the assessee has filed this appeal.

Page 1 of 6

Shri Bhuwaneshwar Singh Maran, Bhopal vs. ITO, 1(1), Bhopal ITA No. 186/Ind/2024 - AY 2007-08 2. We have heard the learned Representatives of both sides and perused

the case record including the orders of lower-authorities.

first-appeal on merit in Para 1.3 but prior to that in Para No. 1.2, he has

dismissed assessee’s appeal as time-barred. So far time-barring issue is

concerned, the CIT(A) has noted that the assessee filed first-appeal before

him on 13.04.2018 against the assessment-order dated 26.02.2015 passed

by AO which was not within statutory period of 30 days. The order passed

by CIT(A) in this regard is re-produced below:

“1.2 Condonation : The present appeal arises from the order u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 ,of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2007-08 dated 26.02.2015. As such, the appeal should have been filed within 30 days of receipt of the order. However, the appeal was filed only on `13.04.2018. The appellant claimed in appeal memo that the above order u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was served on 15.03.2018 and has stated that there was no delay in filing of appeal in the Form -35 and has not filed any condonation. However, the appellant has not provided any proof/evidence for the receipt of order only on 15.03.2018. Based on the above facts, the appellant’s case is liable to be dismissed as the appeal was barred by limitation.”

duly signed by assessee, which is scanned and reproduced below for an

immediate reference:

Page 2 of 6

Shri Bhuwaneshwar Singh Maran, Bhopal vs. ITO, 1(1), Bhopal ITA No. 186/Ind/2024 - AY 2007-08

Page 3 of 6

Shri Bhuwaneshwar Singh Maran, Bhopal vs. ITO, 1(1), Bhopal ITA No. 186/Ind/2024 - AY 2007-08

Page 4 of 6

Shri Bhuwaneshwar Singh Maran, Bhopal vs. ITO, 1(1), Bhopal ITA No. 186/Ind/2024 - AY 2007-08 5. In Point No. 1 and 2 of above synopsis, the assessee has claimed that

he was not served with the notices u/s 148/142(1) and the assessment-

order. In Para No. 3, he has submitted that the assessment-order was

ultimately received by him on 15.03.2018 after filing application to provide

copy of the same and immediately thereafter first-appeal was filed on

13.04.2018, hence the first-appeal was filed in time and the CIT(A) was not

correct in dismissing assessee’s appeal on the ground of delayed filing. This

submission made before us needs to looked into by CIT(A) only as there was

a substantial delay in filing first-appeal before him. Therefore, in the

situation, we are restoring this matter back to CIT(A) for consideration of

assessee’s submission and thereafter pass an appropriate order in

accordance with law.

delay after being satisfied with assessee’s submission and admits the

appeal, he shall decide the merit of case without being influenced by his

previous order. As pointed out by Ld. AR from Para 6 of CIT(A)’s order, the

previous adjudication by CIT(A) on merit was ex-parte despite assessee

seeking adjournments to file rejoinder to remand-report of AO.

Page 5 of 6

Shri Bhuwaneshwar Singh Maran, Bhopal vs. ITO, 1(1), Bhopal ITA No. 186/Ind/2024 - AY 2007-08 7. Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in open court on 26.07.2024

Sd/- sd/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Indore िदनांक /Dated : 26.07.2024 CPU/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYAssistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore

Page 6 of 6