What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that while the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the belated appeals, in the interest of justice and natural justice, the assessee deserves an opportunity to present its case. The impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

The assessee's appeals before the CIT(A) were dismissed due to a delay in filing. The assessee sought restoration of the appeals to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeals solely on the ground of delay without considering the merits, and whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to explain the delay and argue the case on merit.

Usha Kishor Parbat vs ITO | ITAT Nagpur 2024

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO

For Appellant: Ms. Alfia Rozie

For Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

These appeals by the assessee are against the impugned order dated 28/12/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2013–14 and 2014–15 respectively.

When these appeals were taken up for hearing, the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeals on the ground that there is delay in filing the appeals before him. He, therefore, prayed that the appeals may be restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication of the issues raised

2 Usha Kishor Parbat 2013–14 & 2014–15 on merit and in accordance with law and to enable the assessee to substantiate its case.

The learned Departmental Representative strongly objected to the submissions of the assessee in restoring the appeals the file of the learned CIT(A) for denovo adjudication and rather submitted that the appeals be dismissed.

I have heard the rival arguments, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. In these cases, I find that there is a delay in filing the appeals before the learned CIT(A) and the assessee has not furnished Affidavit explaining the cause of delay before the learned CIT(A) and resultantly the learned CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the belated appeals filed by the assessee. However, in the interest of justice and also by following the principles of natural justice, I am of the opinion that the assessee deserves one opportunity to establish its case before the learned CIT(A). Consequently, we set aside the impugned orders passed by the learned CIT(A) and restore both the appeals to his file for denovo adjudication on merit and in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to furnish Affidavit explaining the delay in filing the appeals before the learned CIT(A) by adducing proper evidence. Needless to say that the learned CIT(A) shall provide reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee before adjudication of issues on merit and pass orders in accordance with law.

3 Usha Kishor Parbat 2013–14 & 2014–15

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2013–14 and 2014– 15 are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26/12/2024

USHA KISHOR PARBAT,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(4) NAGPUR , NAGPUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments