RAMESH S,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CIRCLE 7(1), CHENNAI

PDF
ITA 1044/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 June 2024AY 2009-10Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)4 pages

No AI summary yet for this case.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Hearing: 24.06.2024Pronounced: 27.06.2024

आदेश / O R D E R

PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the

Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, (hereinafter in

short ‘the Ld.CIT(A)’), Delhi, dated 01.03.2024 for the Assessment Year

(hereinafter in short ‘AY’) 2009-10.

2.

The main grievance of the assessee is that the Ld.CIT(A) has

passed an ex parte order without going into the merits of the case.

According to the Ld.AR, the Ld.CIT(A) was of the opinion that there was a

ITA No.1044/Chny/2024 (AY 2009-10) S. Ramesh :: 2 ::

delay in filing of the appeal i.e. more than 2802 days (i.e. more than ‘7’

years) and since assessee didn’t file any condonation petition, he didn’t

condone the delay and dismissed the appeal. In this regard, according to

him, the Ld.CIT(A) noted that the assessee has acknowledged in Form 35

that there was a delay in filing of the appeal; and the reason for delay

was stated therein that the business as well as tax related issues were

handled by his late father and the assessee was not aware of the

assessment order passed in AY 2009-10 in this case. According to the

assessee, since his father passed away he was under depression and was

under medical treatment and only when he received the notice from the

Tax Recovery Officer in December, 2022 that he came to know about the

assessment order dated 10.03.2015; and immediately thereafter, had

filed the appeal on 09.01.2023 (20 days). According to the assessee, he

wouldn’t gain by not filing the appeal, when there was an addition of

Rs.35,31,535/-. Therefore, for the ends of justice and fair play, he prays

that the delay may be condoned and matter be restored to the file of the

Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication in accordance to law.

3.

Per contra, the Ld.DR does not want us to give one more

opportunity to the assessee, because, the assessee didn’t file appeal for

very long time (7 years) and since, he also participated in the assessment

proceedings, it cannot be said that he wasn’t aware of the outcome of the

ITA No.1044/Chny/2024 (AY 2009-10) S. Ramesh :: 3 ::

assessment order. We note that the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) is

an ex parte order qua assessee without going into the merits of the case.

The Ld.CIT(A) noted that there was a delay of more than ‘7’ years in filing

of the appeal and therefore, he didn’t condone the delay and dismissed

the appeal of the assessee.

4.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available

on record. We note that the assessment order has been passed in this

case on 10.03.2015 for AY 2009-10; and the assessee has filed the

appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) only on 09.01.2023. Thus, there was delay

of more than ‘7’ years; and even though, the assessee has stated the

reasons as noted supra, we are of the opinion that the assessee ought to

have filed application for condonation of delay along with supporting

documents (medical certificate), affidavit, etc., before the Ld.CIT(A) and

prove his bonafides. And in the absence of the same, the Ld.CIT(A) has

not condoned the delay. However, considering the facts stated in Form

35 as noted supra, for the ends of justice and fair play, we restore the

appeal back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to the assessee to

file condonation application along with supporting documents before the

Ld.CIT(A); and the Ld.CIT(A) to consider the same, and pass order in

accordance to law; and if the Ld.CIT(A) is convinced with the reasons for

delay, he may condone the delay and decide the appeal on merits as

ITA No.1044/Chny/2024 (AY 2009-10) S. Ramesh :: 4 :: contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; and the assessee is directed to be diligent and file written submissions/relevant documents before the First Appellate Authority to substantiate its grounds of appeal and the Ld.CIT(A) after giving proper opportunity to the assessee to pass speaking order in accordance to law.

5.

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

Order pronounced on the 27th day of June, 2024, in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (मनोज कुमार अ�वाल) (एबी टी. वक�) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (ABY T. VARKEY) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �याियक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे�ई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 27th June, 2024. TLN, Sr.PS आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

RAMESH S,CHENNAI vs ITO, CIRCLE 7(1), CHENNAI | BharatTax