SUKHWINDER SINGH,AMBALA CANTT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMBALA

This is assessee's appeal for assessment year 2011-12 against the order dated 29.09.2023 passed by the ld.

That the Ld. AO has erred in law by treating the cash deposits of Rs. 69,29,878/- as unexplained credits under section 68, whereas the same were from business transactions of assessee and were from explainable sources.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee had filed an application dated 28.08.2024 requesting for additional time to file the relevant documents etc. However, finding that the matter can be proceeded with the evidence already available on record, the request for additional time was rejected and the case was proceeded with to be decided on merits.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned order dated 29.09.2023 of the ld.CIT(A) to submit that the ld.CIT(A) has rejected the appeal of the assessee as inadmissible, treating it as barred by limitation.

We have heard the parties and have perused the material on record. It is found that the ld. CIT(A) considered the appeal filed by the assessee as not maintainable, as the same was filed beyond the time limit permitted under Section 249 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and dismissed the appeal of the assessee under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without considering the request of the assessee seeking opportunity to file documents and evidence etc. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has requested that the delay of 55 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A)

The ld. DR has placed strong reliance on the impugned order.

The above facts, as narrated, have not been disputed. The delay of 55 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A), it is ITA 78/CHD/2024 A.Y.2011-12 4 seen, is a bonafide delay, which was incurred due to the non receipt of assessment order by the assessee as the assessee had shifted from Ambala to Delhi several years ago. Otherwise too, the assessee cannot be stated to have gained anything by filing his appeal late before the ld. CIT(A). In these facts and circumstances, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay in the appeal filed by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A), as the assessee was visited by sufficient cause for the delay incurred.

On scrutiny, it is found that there is a delay of 57 days, as pointed out by the Registry, in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application alongwith an affidavit requesting for condonation of delay and explaining the reasons for the delay occurred in filing the present appeal. The contents of the application for condonation of delay are as under :

That later on as and when I was able to get the copy of Assessment Order, Form No. 35 against the Assessment Order u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) was filed on 12/03/2019 wherein my counsel has mentioned his mail id i.e. eakedarkhanalffigmail.com to ensure that compliances were undertaken timely.

That all the notices were being received on the above-mentioned mail id and I was under the impression that my counsel was responding to the notices received regarding the appeal proceedings before the Worthy CIT(A).

That however on ground of non-appearance, worthy CIT(A) passed an appeal order u/s 250 on 14/09/2023 & the same was received by my counsel on his Email on 14/09/2023 and the appeal was accordingly due to be filled before the Hon'ble IT AT was within 60 days i.e., 13/11/2023.

That I was not aware of the said order and was under the impression that my counsel will inform me about the said order in due course and accordingly further course of action will be taken.

That, however, inadvertently my counsel did not kept record of the above-mentioned mail as he was occupied in the audit / Tax Return season and omitted to file the appeal within the said due time course before the Hon'ble ITAT.

That thereafter, now while checking the Income-Tax Portal, it came to my knowledge and realization that the said appeal of AY. 2011-12 was to be filed.

That in this way there has been a delay of 133 days beyond the due date and that there had been no intention from my side to jeopardize the interest of the revenue by delaying the process of the filing of appeal.

Heard. After taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. Even otherwise, the assessee cannot be said to stand to gain anything by deliberately delaying the filing of the appeal before this Tribunal. Therefore, in the ITA 78/CHD/2024 A.Y.2011-12 6 interest of justice, the delay of 57 days caused in filing the present appeal before this Tribunal is condoned.

After considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the CIT(A).

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.