SUNIL WAMAN CHAUDHARY ,THANE V. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, THANE

ITA 6071/MUM/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Sunil Waman Chaudhary against the order of the CIT(A), Pune-11, which dismissed his appeal in limine due to non-payment of full tax on the returned income for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The original assessment was made by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Thane, under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal found that the defect of non-payment of self-assessment tax, which was the basis for the dismissal of the first appeal, had been cured by the assessee by depositing the due taxes. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to remit the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470959 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6071/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Sunil Waman Chaudhary, Plot No.30, Office No.101, Jeevandeep Apartment, Opp. Sibu Palace, Ambarnath, Thane -421 501 (PAN : ACXPC0077A) Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2, Thane (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri Akash Singh, Advocate Revenue : Ms. Monika H. Pande, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 01.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.03.2025 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A), Pune-11. vide order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1065124601(1), dated 24.05.2024 passed against the assessment order by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Thane, u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 27.09.2021 for Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Grounds taken by the assessee are reproduced as under: 1. \"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal without providing any proper opportunity of hearing by holding that the appeal filed is not liable to be admitted as the appellant has not paid the full tax on the returned income.\" 2. \"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in-limine ignoring the fact that the shortfall in payment of 2 ITA No.6071/MUM/2024 Sunil Waman Chaudhary, AY 2019-20 tax on returned income was due to reasons beyond the control of the appellant and therefore, the Id. CIT(A) ought to have decided the appeal on merit.\" 3. \"On the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant, thereby confirmed the addition of Rs. 32,50,000 made by the ld. AO u/s.69A of the Act.\" 3. There is a delay of 114 days noted by the registry in filing the present appeal for which petition of condonation of delay along with affidavit is placed on record. According to the assessee, order of ld. CIT(A), dated 25.05.2024 was received by him on 25.06.2024 by post, dismissing the appeal in limine on the ground that tax on returned income was not fully paid. Assessee submitted that since he could not pay the taxes, appeal filing was delayed. Subsequently, the due taxes on the returned income were deposited by Challan dated 13.09.2024, amounting to Rs.5,35,000/-. Thereafter, assessee proceeded to file the present appeal along with petition for condonation of delay and affidavit. According to the assessee, there is no intention to jeopardize the interest of Revenue, by delaying the filing of the present appeal and hence prayed for condoning the same. 3.1. We have considered the petition for condonation of the said delay along with an affidavit. Upon perusal of the same and hearing both sides, we deem it fit to condone the delay on the ground that there was sufficient cause for the said delay. Accordingly, we condone the delay to take up the matter for adjudication. 4. In the present appeal, order passed by ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order, dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limine on the ground that self assessment tax had remained to be paid. Assessee has deposited the self assessment tax on 13.09.2024 for which copy of challan receipt is placed on record. 3 ITA No.6071/MUM/2024 Sunil Waman Chaudhary, AY 2019-20 5. Before us, it is claimed that, since the defect of non payment of self assessment tax has been cured, assessee be given one more opportunity to represent its case on merits before the ld. CIT(A), since it has been passed ex parte, without dealing with the merits of the case. There being no objection from the other side, in the interest of justice and play and more importantly, when the assessee has cured the defect which formed the basis of dismissal of first appeal by ld. CIT(A), we find it appropriate to remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for denovo meritorious adjudication on the grounds raised by the assessee at the first appellate stage. Needless to say, assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard and to make any further submissions, if so required. Ld. CIT(A) may pass the order afresh after considering the facts on record and the submissions made by the assessee, in accordance with the provisions of law. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 26 March, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Sandeep Gosain) (Girish Agrawal) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 26 March, 2025 MP, Sr.P.S. Copy to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 4. 5. Guard File CIT BY ORDER, (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai "