ITAT grants appeal correction, remands for re-examination, and fresh hearing due to non-appearance and discrepancies.

The ITAT allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, correcting the title of the appeal to reflect the actual appellant. The ITAT acknowledged genuine reasons for non-appearance and discrepancies in the assessment order's naming of the appellant, leading to a remand for re-examination. The appellant was granted a fresh hearing to address all issues due to non-attendance before the ld CIT(A) and delay in filing the appeal before ITAT. The delay in filing was condoned as the appellant derived no benefit from it, ultimately resulting in the appeal being allowed for statistical purposes.

---

---

Issues:
1. Non-attendance before the ld CIT(A) and other issues on merits.
2. Delay in filing the appeal before ITAT.

Analysis:
1. The first issue pertains to non-attendance before the ld CIT(A) and other issues on merits. The appellant raised concerns regarding non-attendance due to notices being sent to an email address that the senior citizen appellant could not access. The appellant highlighted reasons for business losses, emphasizing the inaction of the tax consultant, and requested condonation of non-attendance. The grounds of appeal included challenges to the order's legality, procedural compliance, disallowance of depreciation, and other expenses. The appellant argued for the allowance of depreciation, disputing the AO's disallowance based on symbolic possession by the bank. Additionally, the appellant contested the adhoc disallowance of various expenses without specific defects being pinpointed.

2. The second issue addressed the delay in filing the appeal before ITAT. The appellant filed the appeal 125 days after receiving the ld CIT(A)'s order, citing reliance on a tax consultant who failed to file the appeal and later abandoned the appellant. The appellant requested condonation of delay, attributing the late filing to discovering the delay only upon receipt of recovery notices. The ld DR opposed the condonation, asserting insufficient reasons for the delay. However, the ITAT considered the circumstances, noting that the appellant derived no benefit from the delayed filing. The ITAT ultimately condoned the delay, emphasizing the lack of benefit to the appellant from the delay.

In the final judgment, the ITAT acknowledged the dismissal of the appeal by the ld CIT(A) for non-prosecution due to non-compliance with notices sent via email. The ITAT identified discrepancies in the assessment order's naming of the appellant and the actual party, leading to a correction in the title of the appeal. Noting the genuine reasons for non-appearance and the incorrect naming of the appellant, the ITAT set aside the ld CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case for re-examination. The appellant was granted the opportunity for a fresh hearing to address all issues. Consequently, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, with the ITAT correcting the title of the appeal to reflect the actual appellant.

---