2024 (12) TMI 185 - AT - Income Tax

Firm's 30-day appeal delay condoned due to justifiable reasons, matter restored for fresh adjudication

Ralas Infraventures Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3 (1), Raipur (C.G.)

ITAT Raipur allowed the assessee firm's appeal for statistical purposes. The CIT(Appeals) had declined to condone a 30-day delay in filing the appeal. ... CIT(Appeals) declined to condone the delay of 30 days involved in filing of the appeal before him by the assessee firm - HELD THAT:- CIT(Appeals) ought to have condoned the delay of 30 days, which was not only backed by justifiable reasons, but also by no means can be dubbed as inordinate. Accordingly, in terms of my aforesaid observations, we restore the matter to the file of the ADDL/JCIT(A)-2, Jaipur with a direction to condone the delay of 30 days and dispose of the appeal qua the issues raised before him on merits. ADDL/JCIT(A) shall in the course of set-aside proceedings afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee firm which shall remain at a liberty to substantiate its claim on the basis of fresh documentary evidence, if any. As we have restored the matter to the file of the ADDL/JCIT(A) for fresh adjudication, therefore, refrain from adverting to the merits of the case which, thus, are left open. Appeal filed by the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes. Issues:1. Whether the delay of 30 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(Appeals) should have been condoned by himRs.Analysis:The appeal filed by the assessee firm was directed against the order passed by the ADDL/JCIT(A)-2, Jaipur, arising from the intimation issued by the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC)/A.O under Sec.143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2021-22. The assessee challenged the computation of income under the Head Business and Profession, double taxation of the same income, dismissal of the appeal without condoning the delay, and improper consideration of the merits of the case by the CIT(A). The assessee declared a loss of Rs. (-) 1,18,743/-, which was substituted by an income of Rs. 2,77,257/- by the CPC after making an addition of Rs. 3,96,000. The application for rectification of mistake was rejected, leading to the appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) declined to condone the 30-day delay in filing the appeal, citing lack of sufficient cause or hardship. The assessee then appealed to the tribunal, questioning the CIT(A)'s decision not to condone the delay.The key issue in the present appeal was whether the CIT(A) was right in declining to condone the 30-day delay in filing the appeal by the assessee firm. The delay occurred as the assessee had filed a rectification application with the CPC/A.O, Bengaluru, within the 30-day period for filing an appeal with the CIT(A). The tribunal considered the conduct of the assessee and noted that the delay was not due to a lackadaisical approach. The tribunal referred to a judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh in a similar case, where a delay of 530 days was condoned as the assessee had availed the remedy of rectification before filing the appeal. The tribunal held that the delay in the present case was justifiable and not inordinate, and thus, the CIT(A) should have condoned the delay.The tribunal decided to restore the matter to the file of the ADDL/JCIT(A)-2, Jaipur, with a direction to condone the 30-day delay and dispose of the appeal on its merits. The tribunal emphasized giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity to substantiate its claim with fresh evidence. As the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication, the tribunal refrained from delving into the merits of the case, leaving them open for the ADDL/JCIT(A) to decide. Ultimately, the appeal filed by the assessee firm was allowed for statistical purposes, based on the tribunal's observations.