Delay of 93 days in filing appeals condoned due to pursuing alternative remedies through writ petitions

ITAT Bangalore condoned a 93-day delay in filing appeals before CIT(A), finding reasonable cause as the assessee had pursued alternative remedies through writ petitions before HC. The tribunal held that delay was neither willful nor wanton, citing precedent where even 21 years delay was condoned for similar reasons. On merits, following Karnataka HC decision in assessee's own case, ITAT found assessment orders were passed ex-parte without proper consideration of objections and remitted matters back to AO for fresh adjudication with fair hearing opportunity.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Ex-parte assessment orders u/s 144 and u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147.
2. Additions u/s 68 for unexplained credits.
3. Delay in filing appeals before CIT(A).
4. Condonation of delay and principles of natural justice.

Summary:

1. Ex-parte Assessment Orders u/s 144 and u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147:
In the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15, the assessment orders were passed ex-parte u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. For AY 2012-13, an additional assessment was made u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147, adding Rs. 3.05 crores due to credits through shell companies. For AY 2015-16, the assessment was passed u/s 143(3) with various additions u/s 68 for unexplained credits.

2. Additions u/s 68 for Unexplained Credits:
The Assessing Officer (AO) made several additions u/s 68 in the books of accounts as the assessee failed to explain the source of credits. This was a common issue across the assessment years in question.

3. Delay in Filing Appeals Before CIT(A):
The appeals were filed belatedly before the CIT(A) with delays ranging from 1138 to 2504 days. The assessee claimed the delay was due to pursuing alternative remedies by filing writ petitions before the Hon'ble High Court, which were not filed timely by their advocate.

4. Condonation of Delay and Principles of Natural Justice:
The CIT(A) dismissed the appeals for non-prosecution and did not condone the delay. The assessee argued that the delay was due to pursuing alternative remedies and the high-pitched assessments were passed ex-parte, violating principles of natural justice. The tribunal noted that the assessee was pursuing alternative remedies under a bonafide belief and cited precedents where delays were condoned due to counsel's mistakes or pursuing alternative legal remedies.

Tribunal's Decision:
The tribunal condoned the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A), emphasizing substantial justice over technicalities. The tribunal referenced several judgments, including those of the Supreme Court and High Courts, supporting the condonation of delay when caused by reasonable and sufficient cause. The tribunal remitted the cases back to the AO for fresh consideration in accordance with law, ensuring a fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Conclusion:
The appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the matters were remitted back to the AO for reconsideration, ensuring adherence to principles of natural justice.

---