PRABAL AADHAR SEVA SANSTHA,JAGDALPUR V. EXEMPTION WARD 1 RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 553/RPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Prabal Aadhar Seva Sanstha, the appellant, against the Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward-1, Raipur, the respondent. The appellant's appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC due to delay in filing without considering the merits of the case. The appellant argued that the delay was unintentional, caused by lack of awareness of the CPC intimation and non-responsiveness of their Chartered Accountant. The Tribunal found that the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC did not properly investigate the reasons for the delay and did not follow the mandates of Section 250 (4) & (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a thorough examination of the appellant's reasons for delay and directed the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC to conduct a detailed inquiry and then decide on the merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 783819 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2023-2024
• Appeal Filed On: 23-09-2025
• Other Referred Cases: CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANISHA KINNU
• Assessee Lawyers: AYYAPPA CHOWDHARY
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण Ûयायपीठ रायपुर मɅ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.553/RPR/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2023-24 Prabal Aadhar Seva Sanstha Chandrika Sadan, Bodhghat Thana Road Jagdalpur H.O, Jagdalpur, Baster-494 001 (C.G.) PAN: AACAP6532H ........अपीलाथȸ / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer (Exemption) Ward-1, Raipur (C.G.) ……Ĥ×यथȸ / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Ayyappa Chowdhary, CA Revenue by : Ms. Manisha Kinnu, CIT-DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing : 12.11.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख / Date of Pronouncement : 13.11.2025 Printed from counselvise.com 2 Prabal Aadhar Seva Sanstha Vs. ITO (Exemption), Ward-1, Raipur ITA No. 553/RPR/2025 आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, dated 23.07.2025 for the assessment year 2023-24 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. In this case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine on the ground of delay itself. That before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, the assessee had filed reasons for condonation of delay which reads as follows: “The appellant. Prabal Aadhar Seva Sansthan, humbly submits that there was an unintentional delay in filing the appeal due to the following genuine reasons: Lack of Awareness of CPC Intimation: The society was not aware of the intimation and demand notice issued by CPC as it was uploaded only on the Income Tax Portal without any physical communication. The society did not receive a physical copy of the order via post. Instead, it was emailed by the department, but the email remained unchecked by the society until January 20. Delay Due to Chartered Accountants Non- Responsiveness Upon discovering the demand notice, the society immediately sought assistance from a Chartered Accountant (CA) based in Bhopal, since the CIT (Appeals) office is located in Bhopal. The society resides 900 km away from Bhopal making it logistically difficult to visit in person. Despite submitting all required documents to the CA, there was a continuous delay on his part in preparing and filing the appeal. Genuine Hardship and No Malafide Intent: The delay was not deliberate or to gain any undue advantage. The society has always been compliant with tax laws and exemption conditions. The delay was purely due to lack of communication and dependency on professional assistance. Prayer for Condonation: In light of the above circumstances, the appellant prays for condonation of the delay in filing this appeal under Section 249(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Printed from counselvise.com 3 Prabal Aadhar Seva Sanstha Vs. ITO (Exemption), Ward-1, Raipur ITA No. 553/RPR/2025 which allows CIT (Appeals) to admit an appeal after the prescribed period if there is a sufficient cause for delay The appellant seeks justice and requests the Hon’ble CIT Appeals to consider this as a reasonable cause and allow the appeal in the interest of natural justice.\" The Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC did not find the reasons as supported through evidence and accordingly, dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine on account of delay itself without traveling to the merits of the case. 3. That as evident from Para 2.3 of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC’s order that such delay was not condoned by the said authority since the assessee was unable to substantiate and support through evidences. However, at the time of first appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had also not resorted to the mandate of Section 250 (4) & (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) and thereby, had not conducted any inquiry regarding truthfulness of the assertion made by the assessee in the condonation petition. The assessee had submitted that they were fully dependent on the Chartered Accountant who was non-responsive and despite the assessee submitting all the required documents to the Chartered Accountant, there was delay on his part in preparing and filing the appeal. In other words, the assessee should not be penalized for default of the professional who has been engaged by the said assessee to look into the Income Tax matters. Printed from counselvise.com 4 Prabal Aadhar Seva Sanstha Vs. ITO (Exemption), Ward-1, Raipur ITA No. 553/RPR/2025 4. The issue to be looked into in the present matter is whether the assessee was always vigilant enough regarding proceedings i.e. the appeal to be filed before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and what are the genuine efforts that were conducted by the assessee with his Counsel/Chartered Accountant so to file the appeal on time. In other words, it has to be seen whether the assessee was vigilant assessee, bonafide assessee and whether he has made sufficient efforts to ensure filing of its case before the first appellate authority on time. After verifying all these areas, only one can understand whether such ground of delay would be condoned in terms with Section 249(3) of the Act. 5. At the time of hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that if one final opportunity is provided to the assessee, they will furnish all the relevant documents/evidences explaining the condonation of delay before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. 6. The Ld. Sr. DR did not raise any objection as regards the contentions raised by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. 7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, in the interest of substantive justice, we allow one final opportunity to the assessee to present relevant evidence/documents before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC explaining the reasons for condonation of delay and after going through those evidences, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC shall specifically decide Printed from counselvise.com 5 Prabal Aadhar Seva Sanstha Vs. ITO (Exemption), Ward-1, Raipur ITA No. 553/RPR/2025 whether such delay can be condoned as per Section 249(3) of the Act and then decide on merits of the case in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act. Further, as per the dictate of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom), the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had no power to dismiss an appeal in limine on the ground of non-prosecution and the same jurisprudence transcends into the situation that the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC has no power to dismiss an appeal in limine on ground of delay only without referring and discussing the contents of the assessment order and Form 35 and its annexures. Needless to say, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC shall afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per law. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC is set-aside. 8. As per the above terms, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 13th November, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- ARUN KHODPIA PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) रायपुर/ RAIPUR ; Ǒदनांक / Dated : 13th November, 2025. Printed from counselvise.com 6 Prabal Aadhar Seva Sanstha Vs. ITO (Exemption), Ward-1, Raipur ITA No. 553/RPR/2025 SB, Sr. PS आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ /The Appellant. 2. Ĥ×यथȸ /The Respondent. 3. The CIT(Appeals)-1, Raipur (C.G.) 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर बɅच, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, Raipur Bench, Raipur. 5. गाड[ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur. Printed from counselvise.com "