SHAMLAL COMPANY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,SALEM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1). SALEM, SALEM

[PAN AAICS 4385D] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. T.S.Lakshmi Venkatraman, C.A. ��यथ� क� ओर से /Respondent by : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, IRS, JCIT सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 22.02.2024 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.02.2024 आदेश/ O R D E R This appeal by assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1056099829 (1), dated 14.09.2023. The assessment was framed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Salem for the assessment year 2017-2018, passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’the Act’) vide order dated 22.12.2019.

At the outset, it is noticed that the appeal filed by the 2. assessee is barred by limitation by 35 days. The order of CIT (A) dated 14.09.2023 was communicated to the assessee on 14.09.2023 as per Form 36. The appeal has to be filed on or before 13.11.2023 but was filed only on 18.12.2023. The assessee has filed affidavit for condonation of delay stating the following reasons: ‘’4) The delay of 35 days in filing the above appeal happened because of the following reasons: a) My father Mr.Desraj Bajaj aged about 89 years, who is also a Director of the above company was on cardiac treatment during the month of November 2023 and a certificate dated 10.02.2024 given by our family Cardiologist is enclosed (Encl-1). I am managing the business affairs of the above company and since I was attending to the treatment of my aged father I could not contact my Chartered Accountant Sri.T.S.Lakshmivenkataraman, Salem for drafting the grounds of appeal to be filed before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Benches and for filing of the same. b) Apart from the above factor the concept of "Real Time alert" is not available in the National Faceless Appeal Scheme. The above concept has not been inducted into the National Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2023 and hence neither the appellant nor his authorized representative had been served with any notices vide email or to their mobile. c) The small delay of 35 days in filing the appeal is neither willful nor wanton’’. When these facts were confronted to ld. Senior Departmental Representative, he objected for condoning the delay. I find the cause as reasonable and hence, condone the delay and admit the appeal.

3. At the outset, ld.Counsel for the assessee took me through the order of the ld. CIT(A) consisting of twelve pages and stated that first of all it was ex-parte order. Although in the appellate order it is noted that hearing notices were sent to assessee but there is no response to the same even though five notices were issued to the assessee as noted by the ld. CIT(A). Further, ld Counsel took me to the order of the ld. CIT(A) and stated that apart from reproducing the order of the ld. Assessing Officer, there is no adjudication at all by the ld. CIT(A). When the order of the ld. CIT(A) was confronted to the ld. Senior Departmental Representative he could not state anything except the matter can be remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for adjudication.

4. I have heard the rival contention and perused the material on record. I noted from the order of the ld. CIT(A) that there is no adjudication at all by the ld. CIT(A) except reproducing the ld. Assessing Officer order. I fail to understand what I have to decide when there is not even a word written by the ld. CIT(A). Hence, I set aside the order of CIT(A) and remit the matter back to his file with a direction to adjudicate the issue and decide in accordance with law. In term of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.