Shri Ramjibhai Arjanbhai Pansara, Jamnagar V. TheIncome Tax Officer, Ward-3(5), Jamnagar

ITA 436/RJT/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7290 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 06-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

ITA No.436/RJT/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad) BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.436/RJT/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ramji Arjan Pansara, vs. Income Tax Officer, Patel Park, Ward –3(5), Jamnagar. Ranjit Sagar Road, Street No.8, Jamnagar. [PAN – ADPPP 7608 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri B.D. Gupta, DR Date of hearing : 23.08.2022 Date of pronouncement : 14.09.2022 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.09.2018 passed by the CIT(A), Jamnagar for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal: “1. Ld. CIT (A) erred on facts and in law in refusing to condone delay of 51 days in filing of first appeal without appreciating that appellant was located in village of Jamnagar District and being not much literate and being under depression due to personal difficulties could not approach Chartered Accountant situated at Ahmedabad to understand implications arising out of assessment order and to get the appeal prepared and filed before CIT(A), Jamnagar.” 3. The assessee filed its return of income on 12.09.2014 declaring total income of Rs.3,33,482/-. The assessment order was passed on 26.10.2016 thereby making addition of Rs.30,01,332/- under Section 56(2)(viii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay. ITA No.436/RJT/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Page 2 of 2 5. At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite giving notice. The submissions made by the assessee before the CIT(A) and before the Assessing Officer are taken on record as submissions before us. 6. Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused all the relevant material available on record. The assessee in grounds of appeal has categorically explained that the assessee was located in village and not much literate and because of personal difficulties could not approach the Chartered Accountant situated at Anand and therefore, there was delay of 51 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). This appears to be genuine reason and, therefore, the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) is condoned and in the interest of justice we remand back the issues on merit to be decided by the CIT(A) afresh. Needless to say the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following the principles of natural justice. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 14 th day of September, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) Accountant Member Judicial Member Ahmedabad, the 14 th day of September, 2022 PBN/* Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rajkot Bench, Rajkot