MICHAEL AUGUSTINE,ALAPPUZHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA

The Ld. CIT(A) noted in the impugned order that there was a delay of 150 days in filing the appeal before him. He, therefore, dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

Delay of more than 170 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) is condoned as per the assessee’s averments submitted in his sworn affidavit in light of Hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision Collector, Land Acquisition vs., MST Katiji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) has settled the law long back that all such technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)-NFAC has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of more than 170 days delay. Mr. Antony could hardly dispute the clinching fact that the nFAC’s order has nowhere decided the assessee’s substantive grounds on merits as contemplated u/sec. 250(6) of the Act requiring it to give points for determination followed by a detailed adjudication thereof. Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the NFAC for it’s afresh adjudication, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to the rider that 3 ITA.No.17/COCH./2024 it shall be the taxpayer’s onus and responsibility only to plead and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.