MOHAMMAD SADDIQUE ALI,KATIHAR V. NFAC, KATIHAR

ITA 518/PAT/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mohammad Saddique Ali, the legal heir of Tanjul Haque, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(Appeals) due to a delay in filing, attributed to the health issues of the assessee, including heart disease and recovery from plastic surgery. The ITAT found merit in the assessee's reasons for the delay and decided to condone the delay, providing another opportunity for the assessee to present his case before the CIT(Appeals).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 398333 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" ITA No. 518/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Mohammad Saddique Ali (Legal Heir – Tanjul Haque) 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Hybrid Court Hearing] Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 518/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Mohammad Saddique Ali,……………….…………Appellant [Legal Heir – Tanjul Haque], Raniganj, Sonauli, Kadwa, Katihar-854105, Bihar [PAN:APCPA4371H] -Vs.- Assessment Unit,…………………………………...Respondent Income Tax Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi Appearances by: Shri Sudipta Sannigrahi, C.A., appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: April 29, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: June 04, 2025 O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 21st June, 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2018-19. ITA No. 518/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Mohammad Saddique Ali (Legal Heir – Tanjul Haque) 2 2. The appeal is time barred by 68 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals). However, the Legal Heir of the diseased assessee filed a condonation petition before the ld. CIT(Appeals) saying that he had been suffering from heart disease along with other serious illness and got plastic surgery. Assessment was completed by raising huge demand and the then assessee fell in deep pressure. Lastly, he contacted with the legal adviser of Bhagalpur and decided to file appeal and for that reason the delay had occurred. But ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay. Not being satisfied, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the assessee was prevented in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals) within the stipulated time. Therefore, we are inclined to condone the delay. Hence the delay is condoned. 4. The contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without condoning the delay in filing appeal before him. He further submitted that the assessee was not aware of the date of hearing before the ld. CIT(Appeals) as he was suffering from heart problem and other diseases and got plastic surgery. Therefore, the assessee was not in a position to appear before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without ITA No. 518/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Mohammad Saddique Ali (Legal Heir – Tanjul Haque) 3 condoning the delay saying that the assessee is thoroughly negligent in prosecuting his case. 5. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that sufficient opportunity was being provided to the assessee to substantiate his claim. Therefore, the ld. CIT(Appeals) has no other option except dismissing the appeal and he pleaded to uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). 6. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a condonation petition mentioning the reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, in order to ensure the principle of natural justice, we are of the view that it is a fit case to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to file condonation petition before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, we remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to dispose of the appeal without any inference on the observations of earlier order passed by him. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 04/06/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Awasthi) (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Accountant Member Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 4th day of June, 2025 ITA No. 518/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Mohammad Saddique Ali (Legal Heir – Tanjul Haque) 4 Copies to :(1) Mohammad Saddique Ali, Legal Heir – Tanjul Haque, Raniganj, Sonauli, Kadwa, Katihar-854105, Bihar (2) Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (3) Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi; (4) CIT - ; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S. "