YUGA PRINTPACK PRIVATE LIMITED,. vs. ITO WARD-2(3), FBD, .

This appeal is preferred by the Assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, New Delhi [‘Ld. CIT(A) in short] dated 28.03.2025 passed U/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2013-14.

From the perusal of the appellate order, it is found that ld. CIT(A) has not admitted the appeal as the appeal was filed delay 320 days (excluding the covid limitation from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022) days before the Ld. CIT(A). The reasons given in delay condonation petition was illness of its counsel. Due to illness of the Learned AR, this order was not looked into and so no action has been taken. The assessee during the covid pandemic came to know that appeal was not filed against Yuga Printpack Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO the said penalty order, however immediately after that the present counsel was engaged and appeal was filed delayed by more than 1050 days before the Ld. CIT(A). The reason being sufficient, therefore, it was prayed before the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay and decide the appeal on merits. Further, it is seen that despite of issue of several notices, assessee has failed to make any compliance before the Ld. CIT(A).

Under these circumstances and the interest of justice, we find that the reason given by the assessee for delay has sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). As the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assessee on merits, therefore, all the issues are restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same on merits after providing reasonable opportunities of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to participate in the appellate proceedings and filed the necessary replies within the time limit provided by the Ld. CIT(A). With these directions, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.