Covid-19 limitation exclusion led to restoration of the assessee's appeal for fresh adjudication on merits.

Limitation for filing the assessee's appeal had been computed by counting the Covid-19 period, despite Supreme Court directions requiring that period to be excluded. The first appellate authority therefore rejected the appeal at the threshold for delay. On the record, the matter required reconsideration on merits, and the proceedings were restored for fresh adjudication with an opportunity to the assessee to establish her case, including three effective hearings.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee's appeal, dismissed by the first appellate authority for delay, should be restored for fresh adjudication in view of the exclusion of the Covid-19 period while computing limitation.

Analysis: The appeal was rejected at the threshold on the ground of condonation of delay. The record showed that the period affected by the Covid-19 pandemic had been counted against the assessee, although the limitation directions of the Supreme Court required exclusion of that period. In these circumstances, and in the interest of justice, the matter required reconsideration on merits by the Assessing Officer with an opportunity to the assessee to establish her case in the restored proceedings.

Conclusion: The assessee's appeal was restored for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, with an opportunity of three effective hearings, and the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

---