SRI AMIT PRATAP SINGH,BOKARO V. ITO, WARD 3(1), BOKARO

ITA 359/RAN/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Sai Amit Pratap Singh against the order of the ld CIT(A) Hazaribag, which was dated 18.4.2018 for the assessment year 2012-13. The primary issue was the dismissal of the assessee's appeal by the ld CIT(A) on technical grounds due to a delay of 9 days in filing the appeal, which was later noted as 67 days. The assessee claimed the delay was due to terminal illness, supported by a medical certificate. The Tribunal, after considering the circumstances and the medical certificate, decided to condone the delay and remand the case back to the ld CIT(A) for a decision on the merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 633161 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PER BENCH; KHUBCHANDT PANDYA; LD
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORES/ AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sai Amit Pratap Singh, Main Road, Near Chas Gurudwara, Chas, Bokaro PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Revenue by Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A) Hazaribag dated18.4.2018 year 2012-13. 2. None appeared from the side of the assessee when the matter was called for hearing. Shri Khubchand T Pandya, d Sr 3. We have heard ld Sr DR and perused the record of the case. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.359/RAN/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sai Amit Pratap Singh, Main Road, Near Chas Gurudwara, Chas, Bokaro Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Bokaro .DKUPS 5361 D (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by :Shri Khubchand T Pandya, ld Sr DR Date of Hearing : 11/06/202 Date of Pronouncement :11/06/ O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A) 18.4.2018 in Appeal No.1001/HZB/2017-18 None appeared from the side of the assessee when the matter was called Shri Khubchand T Pandya, d Sr DR appeared for the revenue We have heard ld Sr DR and perused the record of the case. P a g e 1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 3(1), Respondent) hri Khubchand T Pandya, ld Sr DR 2025 /2025 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A)- 18 for the assessment None appeared from the side of the assessee when the matter was called DR appeared for the revenue. We have heard ld Sr DR and perused the record of the case. ITA No.359/RAN/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 P a g e 2 | 3 4. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) clearly shows that the assessee had filed appeal against the assessment order passed u/s.147/144 of the Act. Notices of hearing were sent to the assessee as is evident from the impugned order at page 1. The appeal filed before the ld CIT(A) was time barred by 09 days, as claimed by the assessee. The ld CIT(A) did not condone the delay of 09 days and dismissed the appeal on technical ground stating the assessee failed to explain the reason of delay in filing the appeal. However, the ld CIT(A) noted that the delay is not 9 days but 67 days and no valid reason whatsoever was furnished. The assessee claimed before the ld CIT(A) that the assessee was terminally illand the delay in filing of the appeal was unintentional. In support of the illness, the assessee had filed medical certificate. It is a matter of fact that by filing the appeal delay, the assessee would not get any benefit. There is no culpable negligence or mala fide on the part of the assessee in delayed filing of the appeal. By furnishing the medical certificate in support of the delay in filing the appeal, the assessee has proved his reasonable cause. Once the assesse has preferred the appeal, it seems that he is serious about his appeal. In view of above, we condone the delay of 67 days, as admitted by the revenue and restored the issue back to the file of the ld CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue on merits after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the set aside proceedings and furnish all the evidences as required by the ld CIT(A). ITA No.359/RAN/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 P a g e 3 | 3 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee and appeal of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 11/06/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ranchi; Dated 11/06/2025 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Ranchi 1. The Appellant : Sai Amit Pratap Singh, Main Road, Near Chas Gurudwara, Chas, Bokaro 2. The Respondent: ITO, Ward-3(1), Bokaro 3. The CIT(A)-Hazaribag 4. Pr.CIT,Hazaribag 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// "