OM BIOMEDIC PVT LTD,HISAR V. ACIT,CIRCLE- 19(1), DELHI

ITA 398/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Om Biomedic Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi, concerning the Assessment Year 2016-17. The initial appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to delay, which the assessee attributed to the death of their CA, who received all communications. The ITAT found merit in the assessee's explanation for the delay and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a decision on the merits, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 717825 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 23-01-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR DHANESTA
• Assessee Lawyers: TARANDEEP SINGH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"1 ITA No. 398/Del/2025 Om Biomedic Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI [ DELHI BENCH : “B” NEW DELHI] BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 398/DEL/2025 (A.Y 2016-17) Om Biomedic Private Limited 134/5, Raipur Lane, HTM Road, Near Sector 1 & 4, Hisar-125005 Haryana Vs ACIT Circle 19(1) Delhi Appellant Respondent PAN:AAACO7623G Assessee by Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv Revenue by Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 31/07/2025 Date of Pronouncement 13/08/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 23/08/2024 for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. There is a delay of 84 days in filing the present Appeal. The Assessee filed an application contending that the Assessee has given the e-mail id of his CA to the Ld. CIT(A) while filing the first appeal and the said CA died on 23/12/2023. The communication for passing the order impugned has been sent to the e-mail id of deceased CA, therefore, the Assessee could not file the Appeal on time before the Tribunal. Thus, sought for condoning the delay in filing the present Appeal. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 398/Del/2025 Om Biomedic Pvt. Ltd. 3. Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that, there is no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay, thus sought for dismissal of the present Appeal on delay in latches. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record on the issue of delay in filing the present Appeal. It is the case of the Assessee that, Assessee has mentioned the e-mail id of his CA to the Ld. CIT(A) while filing the first appeal for any communication and the said CA died on 23/12/2023. The communication of passing the order impugned has been sent to the e- mail id of deceased CA, therefore, the Assessee could not file the Appeal on time before the Tribunal. 5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the Appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay. In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji& Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that the delay when supported by justifiable reasons, must make way for the cause of substantial justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 84 days in filing the present Appeal. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 28/12/2018 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 398/Del/2025 Om Biomedic Pvt. Ltd. 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 28/12/2018, the Assessee preferred the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 23/08/2024, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee on delay in latches. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal. 7. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has provided no opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and in violation of principals of natural justice, dismissed the appeal of the Assessee. 8. The Ld. Department's Representative relying on the order of Lower authorities sought for dismissal of the appeal. 9. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) , the Appeal has been passed ex-parte without hearing the Assessee. It is further observed that while deciding the Appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal of the Assessee on its merits. Considering the facts that the Assessee has not participated in the first Appellate proceedings, in the interest of natural justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 398/Del/2025 Om Biomedic Pvt. Ltd. Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 10. In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 13th August, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 13.08.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "