Appeal delay condoned for non-receipt of notices, emphasizing substantial justice over technicalities.

The delay in filing the appeal was condoned due to non-receipt of notices, leading to ex-parte dismissal by the CIT(A), NFAC. The Tribunal emphasized substantial justice over technicalities and admitted the appeal for adjudication. Regarding the merits, the Tribunal found the assessee deprived of justice due to non-receipt of notices and directed a fresh adjudication by the CIT(A), emphasizing cooperation and avoiding frivolous adjournments. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, ensuring a fair opportunity for the assessee to present their case.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal
2. Merits of the Case: Non-receipt of Notices and Opportunity of Being Heard

Summary of Judgment:

1. Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal:
The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 318 days. The delay was attributed to the non-receipt of notices at the correct email address, which led to the ex-parte dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A), NFAC. The assessee became aware of the dismissal only after receiving a penalty notice from the AO. The Tribunal considered affidavits from the assessee and his Chartered Accountant, which confirmed the non-receipt of notices and justified the delay. Citing various judgments, including Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST Katiji, the Tribunal emphasized the principle of "substantial justice" over technicalities and condoned the delay, admitting the appeal for adjudication on merits.

2. Merits of the Case: Non-receipt of Notices and Opportunity of Being Heard:
The assessee argued that the CIT(A), NFAC decided the appeal without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard, as the notices were allegedly sent to an incorrect email address. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had issued multiple notices, none of which were complied with by the assessee. However, affidavits from the assessee and his Chartered Accountant supported the claim of non-receipt of notices. The Tribunal found that the assessee was deprived of justice due to technical lapses and decided to restore the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal directed the assessee to cooperate and avoid frivolous adjournments.

Conclusion:
The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the case was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, ensuring the assessee is given a fair opportunity to present his case. The order was pronounced in the open Court on 17/03/2023.

---