Sandeep , New Delhi V. ITO, Ward 72(5), New Delhi

ITA 1935/DEL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Sandeep, against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which pertained to the assessment year 2016-17. The primary contention was the dismissal of the assessee's appeal by the CIT(A) solely on the grounds of delay in filing, without considering the merits of the case. The assessee argued that there was sufficient cause for the delay, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument and decided to condone the delay and remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a decision on the merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 108552 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 13-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 29-06-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 250; 69A

Judgement Text

1 ITA No. 1935/Del/2023 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1935/DEL/2023 [Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sandeep, I 1502-03 Jahangir Puri, Delhi-110033. PAN-CIMPS5510H Vs Income-tax Officer, Ward-72(5), New Delhi APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shi Parnav yadav, Ad. Department represented by Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 14.09.2023 Date of pronouncement 14.09.2023 O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 02.05.2023, pertaining to the assessment year 2016-17. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and: in law, the order passed by the assessing officer is bad-in-law and without jurisdiction and CIT (A) erred in not holding: 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the C1T(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing of appeal 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by CIT (A) is against the principles of natural justice 2 ITA No. 1935/Del/2023 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) erred in not' adjudicating the grounds of appeal on merit 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 12,00,000/- made by the assessing officer on the account of alleged unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act.” 2. Learned counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the learned CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal and dismissing the assessee’s appeal solely on the ground of delay in filing the appeal, without going into the merits of the case. Learned counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. 167 ITR 471 (SC) and submitted that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in not filing the appeal before the CIT(A) within stipulated time. He prayed that the delay in filing the appeal may be condoned and the matter may be restored to the file of learned CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits. 3. On the other hand, learned DR opposed the submissions and relied on the order of learned CIT(A). 4. I have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal, inter alia, observing as under: 3 ITA No. 1935/Del/2023 “In the result, the present appeal fails since the delay in filing of appeal. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is treated as dismissed u/s 250 r.w.s. 251 of the Act without considering the merits of the appeal filed.” 4.1 A perusal of the order of learned CIT(A) reveals that he has dismissed the assessee’s appeal in limine for delay in filing the appeal without going into the merits of the case. Therefore, in order to to subserve the ends of justice, in the light of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (supra), I condone the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(Appeals) and restore the matter to the file of learned CIT(A) with direction to decide the appeal on merits after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee of being heard and to produce documentary evidence, if any, in support of his case. Appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 14 th September, 2023. Sd/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER *MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI