Indira Sastry, Bangalore V. ACIT, Circle Int. Tax 1(1)(1), New Delhi

ITA 2478/DEL/2022

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Indira Sastry, against the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-42, New Delhi, which pertained to the assessment year 2013-14. The primary issue in the appeal was the dismissal of the assessee's appeal by the Commissioner of Appeals on the grounds of delay, without considering a petition for condonation of delay that was filed separately. The Tribunal criticized the Commissioner of Appeals for not examining the merits of the case and for dismissing the appeal on technical grounds, emphasizing that justice should not be denied on such bases.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 300642 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 02-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 05-10-2022
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2478/Del/2022 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Indira Sastry, No.58/Y, 5 th Main, 4 th Phase, 7 th Block, BSK 3 rd Stage,Bangalore, Bangaluru, Karnataka-560085 Vs. ACIT, Circle Int Tax-1(1)(1), New Delhi PAN :EHBPS3633F (Applicant) (Respondent) ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 10.08.2022 of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-42 New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2013-14. Appellant by Shri Suresh Muthukrishna, CA Department by Shri S.N. Pandey, Sr. DR Date of hearing 03.04.2023 Date of pronouncement 11.04.2023 2 ITA No. 2478/Del/2022 2. We have heard Shri Suresh Muthukrishna, learned counsel appearing for the assessee and ShriS.N. Pandey, learned Senior Departmental Representative. 3. The sole grievance of the assessee is against dismissal of assessee’s appeal in limine by learned Commissioner (Appeals), on the ground of delay. 4. On perusal of facts on record, it is observed, the assessee filed the appeal before learned Commissioner (Appeals) with a delay of 18 days. However, inadvertently, in Form No.35 filed electronically, assessee did not mention that there is delay in filing the appeal. Nevertheless, the assessee uploaded a petition along with Form 35, seeking condonation of delay. This fact has been clearly admitted by learned Commissioner (Appeals). In fact, the contents of the petition seeking condonation of delay has been reproduced in the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals). Only for the reason that the assessee has failed to mention about the delay in Form No. 35, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay, by alleging that the assessee is neither careful nor diligent. This, in our view, is, unacceptable. 3 ITA No. 2478/Del/2022 5. When the assessee has separately filed an application seeking condonation of delay and furnished sufficient reason for not being able to file the appeal in time, learned Commissioner (Appeals) should have examined assessee’s claim on its own merits instead of raising technical issue that assessee did not mention the fact of delay in Form No. 35. It is trite law, endeavor has to be made for deciding the issue on merits and not to shut down the door of justice on a litigant for technical reasons. Thus, on overall consideration of facts and material on record, we are of the view that the assessee had sufficient reason for not filing the appeal in time. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of learned Commissioner (Appeals) and restore the matter back to his file with a direction to decide assessee’s appeal on merits after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Grounds are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 11 th April, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- ( G.S. PANNU ) (SAKTIJIT DEY) PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 11 th April, 2023. Mohan Lal 4 ITA No. 2478/Del/2022 Copy forwarded to: 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi