HAMID MEMORIAL WELFARE SOCIETY,SAHASPUR, BIJNOR V. NFAC DELHI, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

ITA 9/LKW/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Hamid Memorial Welfare Society, an educational institution, appealing against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which dismissed their appeal on grounds of limitation and non-compliance. The original assessment determined the assessee's income at Rs.36,51,488 for the year 2019-20. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as it was filed beyond the prescribed time limit. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had erred in rejecting the appeal without considering 'sufficient cause' for the delay and that the Assessing Officer had not provided a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471419 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Other Referred Cases: CIT v S. Chennaiappa Mudaliar (1969) SC (591), Balaji Steel Re-rolling Mills v Commissioner Excise & Customs (2014) 52 (SC), Land Acquisition vs Mst. Katiji 1987 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJEEV KRISHNA SHARMA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside
• Section: 144; 250

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.9/LKW/2025 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Hamid Memorial Welfare Society Sahaspur, Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh-246745. v. NFAC, Delhi New Delhi. PAN:AAAAH4849K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. CIT(DR) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: 1. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), dated 06/11/2024 for the assessment year 2019-20. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under: - “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi u/s 250 of the Act is bad both in the eyes of law and on facts. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the impugned order passed by the Ld. NFAC is against the principles of natural justice. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, that Ld. NFAC has erred in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee solely on the grounds of non-compliance by the assessee and the delay in filing the appeal, without verifying the facts of the case. The assessee, therefore, prays that the impugned order be set aside. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. NFAC has erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte without deciding the appeal on merits as laid down in CIT v S. Chennaiappa Mudaliar (1969) SC (591) and Balaji Steel Re-rolling Mills v Commissioner Excise & Customs (2014) 52 (SC) and Land Acqusition vs Mst. Katiji 1987 (SC). ITA No.9/LKW/2025 Page 2 of 3 5 That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. NFAC made an error in failing to appreciate that the assessee is an Educational Institution existing solely for Educational Purpose and has been running a School by the name of ‘H.M. Girls Inter College’ in village Sahaspur, Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh and whereas the education institution has been duly recognized by the Uttar Pradesh Educational Board, Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, making it eligible for exemption u/s 10(23)(iiiad) of the Act. 6. That the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. NFAC has been solely a procedure.” 2. In this case, vide assessment order dated 03/09/2021 passed by the Assessing Officer under section 144 read with section 144B of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 1961 (“Act”, for short) the assessee’s total income was determined at Rs.36,51,488/-. The assessee filed appeal in the office of the Ld. CIT(A). However, the appeal filed by the assessee in the office of the Ld. CIT(A) was beyond time limit prescribed u/s 249(2) of the Act. Vide aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 06/11/2024, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal in limine on grounds of limitation. 2.1 At the time of hearing, the assessee was represented by none. In the absence of any representation from the assessee’s side, the Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative (“DR”, for short) for Revenue was heard. He relied on the orders passed by the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A). However, he submitted that he had no objection if the issue in dispute is set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer with direction to pass fresh assessment order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 3. The Ld. Sr. DR for Revenue has been heard and materials placed on record have been perused. On perusal of the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 06.11.2024, it is found that the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the assessee’s appeal for condonation of delay under section 249(3) of the Act despite the fact that the assessee ITA No.9/LKW/2025 Page 3 of 3 was prevented from filing the appeal in the office of the Ld. CIT(A) within time limit prescribed under section 249(3) of the Act; by ‘sufficient cause’. It is also found that the Assessing Officer passed the order without extending reasonable opportunity to the assessee. In view of the foregoing, and as learned Departmental Representative has no objection to this; the impugned appellate order dated 06.11.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and all the issues in dispute in the present appeal before us are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass denovo order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. All the grounds of appeal in the present appeal before us are treated as disposed off in accordance with the aforesaid direction. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27/02/2025. Sd/- [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:27/02/2025 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard file By order //True Copy// Assistant Registrar "