ASHISH KESHAV UKEY,NAGPUR V. ITO WARD 1(5), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

ITA 515/NAG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Ashish Keshav Ukey against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which were initially dismissed as time-barred due to the assessee's failure to comply with procedural requirements, including not filing a condonation of delay application and not appearing before the CIT(A) despite several notices. The Tribunal noted the assessee's non-compliance and procedural delays but decided to set aside the ex-parte order and remit the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits, emphasizing the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal also imposed a cost on the assessee for the procedural lapses.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474308 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDIPKUMAR SALUNKE
• Assessee Lawyers: ABHISHEK KUMAR
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.515 and 516/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2017–18) Ashish Keshav Ukey FF–2, Shahas Apartments WHC Road, Bajaj Nagar Square Nagpur 440 010 PAN – AAOPU7596 ……………. Appellant v/s Income Tax Officer Ward–1(5), Nagpur ……………. Respondent Assessee by : Shri Abhishek Kumar Revenue by : Shri Sandipkumar Salunke Date of Hearing – 04/02/2025 Date of Order – 25/02/2025 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. These appeals by the assessee are against the common impugned order dated 26/06/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2017–18. 2. During the course of hearing, the Registry has pointed out a delay of 29 days in filing the present appeals before the Tribunal. While going through the record available before us, we find that the assessee has even not bothered to file any application for condonation of delay supported by duly sworn affidavit. It is more surprising to note that there was even delay in filing first 2 Ashish Keshav Ukey ITA no.515 & 516/Nag./2024 appeal before the learned CIT(A). Before the learned CIT(A) also, the assessee did not file any application for condonation of delay. Leave aside this, the assessee even chose not to appear before the learned CIT(A) despite several statutory notices issued by the learned CIT(A). The non–compliant attitude of the assessee has to be taken a serious note. Due to lackadaisical approach in the proceedings, the learned CIT(A) passed ex–parte order and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee being time barred. Under these circumstances, we are of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one opportunity should be given to the assessee to substantiate the case before the learned CIT(A), since the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) is an ex-parte order. In view of the above, the ex-parte order passed by the learned CIT(A) is hereby set aside and remit the matter back to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. The assessee is also directed to file before the learned CIT(A) an application for condonation of delay duly supported by a sworn Affidavit on the basis of which the learned CIT(A) is left on his own discretion to decide the condonation application on merits and then proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merit, if so deem fit keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes. 3 Ashish Keshav Ukey ITA no.515 & 516/Nag./2024 3. Insofar as non–appearance of the assessee before the authorities below are concerned, the primary onus lies on the assessee to co-operate in the proceedings before the learned CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer. In case, the assessee does not do so, the assessee deserves to be penalized and hence we feel that the penalty has to be imposed upon the assessee and the same should be commensurate to the default committed by him. As a result of non- compliance and procedural delays, we deem it fit and appropriate to impose a cost upon the assessee for an amount of ` 5,000 (Rupees Five Thousand Only) for each appeal aggregating to ` 10,000 (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) payable to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority and adduce evidence of payment before the learned CIT(A). This cost underscores the importance of adhering to the procedural requirements and timely compliance during assessment and appellate proceedings. 4. In the result, appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25/02/2025 Sd/- K.M. ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 25/02/2025 4 Ashish Keshav Ukey ITA no.515 & 516/Nag./2024 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur "