MD MUDASSAR NAZAR LASKAR,NORTH 24 PARGANAS vs. ITO, WARD-50(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A)-XXXII, Kolkata vide Appeal No. 61/CIT(A)-XXXII/11-12/50(1)/Kol dated 01.06.2012. Assessment was framed by ITO, Ward-50(1), Kolkata u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2008-09 vide his order dated 10.12.2010.

The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) refusing to condone the delay in filing appeal u/s. 249 of the Act and not admitting the appeal.

We have heard Ls. Sr. DR and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. Briefly stated facts are that the assessment order dated 10.12.2010 passed by ITO, Wd- 50(1), Kolkata was received by assessee on 07.01.2011 and appeal was filed before CIT(A) on 05.08.2011, thereby there was delay of 180 days. The assessee before CIT(A) pleaded that the assessee is living in an interior part of rural area in West Bengal suffering from various ailments at the material period of time. The assessee before CIT(A) submitted photo copies of medical certificate and from which it was noticed by CIT(A) that the assessee was suffering from November, 2010 to July, 2011 and was advised rest in the abovementioned period. But according to CIT(A), the Medical Officer did not give any treatment for the disease and the disease is also not so serious that one person cannot fulfill the mandatory duties. Accordingly, he dismissed the appeal of the assessee as not admitted. Now before us, ld. Sr. vehemently supported the order of CIT(A) in not condoning the 2 Md. Mudassar Nazar Laskar, AY 2008-09 delay. We find that the CIT(A) himself admitted that assessee has filed copies of medical certificate from where he noticed that the assessee was suffering from ailments from November, 2010 to July, 2011 and was also advised rest for the abovementioned period. In any case, if the CIT(A) has suspicion he could have summoned the Medical Officer and could have examined the person but he simply ignored everything and delay was not condoned and appeal was dismissed as not maintainable. We find that cause is reasonable as mentioned in the order of CIT(A). The facts clearly revealed that the assessee was ill which is supported by medical certificate. In term of the above, we condone the delay occurred for filing of appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to admit the appeal and adjudicate the same on merits. Appeal of assessee is allowed.

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (Waseem Ahmed) (Mahavir Singh) Accountant Member Judicial Member