DIPTI DIVYESH MODI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(3)(6), SURAT, SURAT

Assessee represented by Shri P.M. Jagasheth, CA Department represented by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Institution of appeal 02/01/2023 Date of hearing 25/04/2023 Date of pronouncement 25/04/2023 Order under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short, the ld. CIT(A)) dated 11/11/2022 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in not condoning delay of one day in filing of appeal u/s 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. The ld. CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed the addition of Rs. 30,73,790/- without considering the material available on record.”

2. At the outset of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee by taking a view that the appeal of assessee is delayed by one day in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR of the assessee Dipti Divyesh Modi Vs ITO submits that the Assessing officer passed the assessment order on 28/10/2018 and the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) was filed on 28/11/2018. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that if one day is excluded while calculating the period of limitation, the appeal of assessee was within time. The ld. AR in his without prejudice submission, submitted that it was merely a miscalculation of time period and the assessee has no deliberate and malafide intention in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A) belatedly, if any. The ld. AR for assessee submits that the substantial right of assessee are involved in the present appeal. The ld. CIT(A) not admitted the appeal for technical reasons by taking view that the appeal is filed after one day of period of limitation. The ld. AR of the assessee prayed that the delay if any in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A) may be condoned and matter may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of various grounds of appeal on merit.

3. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue submits that he left the issue at the discretion of the Bench.

4. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and find merit in the submission of ld. AR of the assessee that delay if any of one day is only for miscalculation of time period in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A) which I accept and condone one day delay in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Considering the fact that the impugned one-day delay is