Tribunal allows appeal after delay, grants assessee hearing opportunity for fair adjudication.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to wrong advice from a Chartered Accountant, admitted the appeal for adjudication, and granted the assessee another opportunity for a hearing. The matter was remanded back to the ld CIT(A) to allow the assessee to present its contentions and submissions for a decision on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity. The Tribunal emphasized fairness and justice in providing the assessee with multiple chances to be heard and considered on the merits of the case.

---

---

Issues:
1. Delay in filing the appeal and condonation application.
2. Opportunity provided to the assessee for hearing.
3. Assessment of demand raised in the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act.
4. Decision on the appeal by the ld CIT(A).
5. Remand of the matter for providing another opportunity to the assessee.

Issue 1: Delay in filing the appeal and condonation application:
The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-03, Jaipur dated 06.03.2018 for Assessment Year 2013-14. There was a delay of 242 days in filing the appeal, and the assessee filed a condonation application citing wrong advice from a Chartered Accountant as the reason for the delay. The ld DR opposed the condonation application, stating that no reasonable cause was demonstrated by the assessee for the delay. The Tribunal referred to the case law of Collector, Land Acquisition vs MST Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471, where it was held that the expression 'Sufficient Cause' allows for a liberal approach to condone delay to ensure justice. The Tribunal found that the delay was not deliberate, and the assessee acted diligently based on advice from the Chartered Accountant. Consequently, the delay in filing the appeal was condoned, and the appeal was admitted for adjudication.

Issue 2: Opportunity provided to the assessee for hearing:
The Tribunal noted that the matter was scheduled for a hearing through video conferencing due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The assessee did not appear, but an adjournment application was received citing urgent family health issues. The ld. DR informed that the assessee had been given multiple opportunities by the ld CIT(A) and the Tribunal for hearings, but no attendance or written submissions were made. Despite adjournments sought by the authorized representative, no progress was made. The Tribunal acknowledged the provided opportunities but deemed it appropriate to grant the assessee another chance to be heard.

Issue 3: Assessment of demand raised in the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act:
Following the processing of the assessee's income tax return by the CPC, an intimation under section 143(1) of the Act was issued, raising a demand of Rs. 25,950. The matter was contested before the ld CIT(A) but was decided ex-parte due to non-compliance by the assessee. The Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the ld CIT(A) to allow the assessee another opportunity to present its contentions and submissions for a decision on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity.

Issue 4: Decision on the appeal by the ld CIT(A):
The ld CIT(A) had decided the appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance by the assessee. However, as the appeal was not decided on merits, the Tribunal found it necessary to remand the matter back to the ld CIT(A) to ensure justice and fair play by providing the assessee with another opportunity to present its case.

Issue 5: Remand of the matter for providing another opportunity to the assessee:
In the interest of justice and fairness, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. The decision was made to remand the matter back to the ld CIT(A) to provide the assessee with another opportunity to present its contentions, which would be decided on merits after a reasonable opportunity was given to the assessee.

In conclusion, the Tribunal addressed the delay in filing the appeal, provided insights into the opportunities given to the assessee for hearings, discussed the assessment of the demand raised in the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act, highlighted the decision-making process of the ld CIT(A), and ultimately decided to remand the matter for the benefit of the assessee's right to be heard and considered on merits.

---