KAYSONS APPARELS,LUDHIANA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, LUDHIANA

ITA 403/CHANDI/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Kaysons Apparels, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2016-17. The primary contention was the ex-parte nature of the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer and the subsequent dismissal of their appeal by the CIT(A) on technical grounds due to a significant delay in filing the appeal. The assessee argued that the delay was beyond their control as they had not received any notice or assessment order prior to receiving a notice for tax deposition, which led to the delayed filing of the appeal by 308 days.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 36075 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK VARDHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHWANI KUMAR
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 22

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 403/CHD/2024 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Kaysons Apparels, 193-L, Model Town, Ludhiana 141002 बनाम Vs. The ITO, Ludhiana èथायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAPKF1728E अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent ( PHYSICAL HEARING ) Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr,.DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 20.01.2025 उदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, AM : Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 12.03.2024 of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. At the very outset, ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is an ex-parte order and the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for 403-Chd-2024 Kaysons Apparels, Ludhiana 2 the reason that the appeal filed was delayed by 308 days though the application for Condonation of Delay was filed before the ld. CIT(A) but the ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal without giving any finding on the merits of the case. The ld. Counsel prayed that the delay in filing of the appeal was because of the reasons beyond the control of the Assessee as the Assessee had not received any notice either from the A.O. nor did the Assessee receive any assessment order. It came to know about completion of assessment only after the receipt of notice for depositing tax and then they obtained a copy of the assessment from the A.O. and filed this appeal which was delayed by 308 days. 3. The ld. DR relied on the orders of the CIT(A). 4. We have considered the submissions of the Counsel of the Assessee and the appellate order passed by the ld. CIT(A). We find that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer in this case is an ex-parte order as the Counsel of the Assessee claims that the Assessee did not receive any notice for the assessment. We also find that the appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is on technical ground as the ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in filing of the appeal and at the 403-Chd-2024 Kaysons Apparels, Ludhiana 3 same time he has not given any findings in his appellate order. It is against the natural justice to the Assessee. Accordingly, we hereby order to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and remand this case back to the file of the CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the CIT(A). All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly. 6. In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 22 .01.2025. Sd/- Sd/- ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ( KRINWANT SAHAY) Vice President Accountant Member “आर.क े.” आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत/ CIT 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar "