A.P.ASSOCIATES,HARIDWAR V. ACIT, HARIDWAR

ITA 37/DDN/2025

AI Insights

A. P. Associates filed appeals against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which had dismissed their earlier appeals for the assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. The Tribunal noted a significant delay in filing these appeals, attributed to the assessee's initial online filing not being registered due to the absence of physical copies. The Tribunal found the delay to be justifiable and cited the Supreme Court's precedent in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others, emphasizing the need to prioritize substantial justice over procedural technicalities. The Tribunal also observed that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals ex-parte without hearing the assessee, which violated the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 716800 (ITAT-DEHRADUN)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 03-03-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A. S. RANA
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJAT SHARMA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard; Period of limitation; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 25, 26 & 37/DDN/2025 A. P.Associates Vs. CIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI [ DELHI BENCH : “DEHRADUN”/ NEW DELHI] BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 25/DDN/2025 (A.Y 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 26/DDN/2025 (A.Y 2014-15) I.T.A. No. 37/DDN/2025 (A.Y 2015-16) A. P. Associates Shyampur Pili, Haridwar, 249401, Uttarakhand PAN: AAQFA1066N Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Dehradun, Uttarakhand Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Rajat Sharma, CA Revenue by Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement 22/08/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The above captioned appeals are filed by the Assessee against the common orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 17/10/2022for the Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2015-16 respectively. 2. There is a delay of 766 days in filing the above Appeals. The Assessee filed an application for condonation of delay contending that the Assessee filed the Appeals in online mode well within the period of limitation on 12/12/2022 itself before the Tribunal. However, the Appeals filed online have not been fixed for hearing and when enquired Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 25, 26 & 37/DDN/2025 A. P.Associates Vs. CIT with the registry of the Tribunal found that as the Assessee has not filed physical form of the Appeals, the Appeals filed online have not been numbered. Thereafter the Assessee once again filed the present Appeals and contended that there is a bona-fide reason for filing the captioned Appeals belatedly and sought for condoning the delay in filing the present Appeals. 3. Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that, there is no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay in filing the above Appeals, thus sought for dismissal of the present Appeals on delay in latches. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record on the issue of delay in filing the present Appeal. The Assessee contended that the Assessee filed the Appeals in online mode well within the period of limitation on 12/12/2022 itself before the Tribunal. However, the Appeals filed online have not been fixed for hearing and when enquired with the registry of the Tribunal found that as the Assessee has not filed physical form of the Appeals, the Appeals filed online have not been numbered. Thereafter the Assessee once again filed the present Appeals and contended that there is a bona-fide reason for filing the captioned Appeals belatedly. To substantiate the above Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 25, 26 & 37/DDN/2025 A. P.Associates Vs. CIT contention of the Assessee, the Assessee produced e-filing acknowledgements dated 08/12/2022 and also system generated e-mails sent from the e-filing team of ITAT dated 12/12/2022. It is not in dispute that the Assessee has indeed e-filed the Appeals on time and the Appeals have not been registered as the physical set of appeal memo and the enclosures have not been submitted. The fresh Appeals have been filed by the Assessee belatedly after coming to know that its Appeals have not been registered. 5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the Appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay. In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji& Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that the delay when supported by justifiable reasons, must make way for the cause of substantial justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 766 days in filing the captioned Appeals. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessment orders for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2015-16 came to be passed on 29/12/2017 u/s Section143(3)/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions/disallowance. Aggrieved by the assessment Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 25, 26 & 37/DDN/2025 A. P.Associates Vs. CIT orders dated 29/12/2017, the Assessee preferred Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide orders dated 17/10/2022, dismissed the Appeals filed by the Assessee. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeals. 7. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has provided no opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and in violation of principals of natural justice, dismissed the appeals of the Assessee. 8. The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that sufficient opportunity has been given by the Ld. CIT(A), however, the Assessee failed to represent before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Department's Representative relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities, sought for dismissal of the Appeals. 9. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the orders of the Ld. CIT(A), the Appeals have been passed ex-parte without hearing the Assessee. It is further observed that, while deciding the Appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeals of the Assessee on its merits. Considering the facts that the Assessee has not participated in the first Appellate proceedings, in the interest of natural justice, we remand the matters to Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No. 25, 26 & 37/DDN/2025 A. P.Associates Vs. CIT the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the first Appeals afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 10. In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos. 25/DDN/2025, 26/DDN/2025 and 37/DDN/2025 are partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd August, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 22 .08.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA No. 25, 26 & 37/DDN/2025 A. P.Associates Vs. CIT Printed from counselvise.com "