4G COMMUNICATIONS,PONDICHERRY V. ITO, WARD-5., PONDICHERRY

ITA 1618/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by 4G Communications against an order passed by the Addl./JCIT(A)-10, Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18. The appeal was initially dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) due to the assessee's failure to appear, which was attributed to a lack of awareness of the hearing schedule and defects in the notice. The Tribunal found the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal to be bona fide and thus condoned the delay. The Tribunal noted that the assessee was not notified of the hearing or any defects in the appeal, leading to the decision to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case for a decision on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772688 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N. RAJA KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: T.VASUDEVAN
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी एस.आर. रगुनाथॎ, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1618/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2017-18 4G Communications, 30, 1st Floor, 1st Cross, West Sathiya Nagar, Saram, Puducherry 605 013. [PAN:AABFZ5235D] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 5, Pondicherry. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri N. Rajakumar, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 25.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 28.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06.03.2025 passed by the Addl./JCIT(A)-10, Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 2 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1618/Chny/25 2 prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee raised 8 grounds of appeal amongst which, the only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in dismissing the appeal exparte of the assessee in the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. At the outset, we note that the ld. AR Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate submits that no notice of hearing or defects notified by the ld. CIT(A) as the assessee was not aware of the limitation and passed exparte order without adjudicating on merits of the case. He prayed that suitable direction may be issued to consider the condonation petition and decide the issue on merits by affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 5. The ld. DR Shri N. Rajakumar, Addl. CIT(A) relied on the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. On perusal of Col. 14 of Form 35, we note that the assessee has mentioned “No” as whether there is delay in filing appeal and thus, it is clear that the assessee was not aware of the limitation. On perusal of the impugned order, we note that no notice of hearing/defects notified by Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1618/Chny/25 3 the ld. CIT(A) to the assessee before completing the first appellate order. Under the above facts and circumstances, we set aside the impugned order and direct the ld. CIT(A) to consider the application for condoning the delay and condone the delay of 9 days, if any, in filing the appeal by the assessee and adjudicate the issue on merits by affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to file condonation petition before the ld. CIT(A). Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 28th August, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 28.08.2025 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "