2017 (8) TMI 1383 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay - e-filing of appeal - Held that - Direct the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay in dispute. And also in the interest of justice, set aside the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same afresh, under the law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the appeal on merit and pass a speaking order, keeping in view of the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Hossein Kasam Dada vs. State of MP (1953 (2) TMI 35 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA)

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-31 for assessment year 2008-09; Validity of order passed by Ld. CIT (A) u/s. 250 of the I.T. Act; Dismissal of appeal u/s 264A; Dismissal of appeal for failure to file e-appeal as per CBDT circular; Condonation of delay in dispute.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the Order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-31 for the assessment year 2008-09. The Assessee challenged the validity of the order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) u/s. 250 of the I.T. Act, claiming it to be bad in law and void ab initio. The Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal u/s 264A against the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147, which the Assessee contended was without any basis. The Assessee also disputed the dismissal of the appeal on the ground of failure to file e-appeal as per CBDT circular, despite having filed it manually and electronically within the extended time limit.

During the hearing, the Assessee presented a Paper Book containing various documents and judgments to support their case. The Ld. Counsel highlighted the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India to request a fresh decision by the Ld. CIT(A) after providing adequate opportunity to be heard. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of the authorities below.

After considering the submissions and perusing the records, the Tribunal directed the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay in dispute and set aside the issues for fresh consideration. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a speaking order based on merit, in line with the judgments cited. The Assessee was instructed to cooperate fully in the proceedings and not unnecessarily delay the process. Ultimately, the Assessee's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision focused on ensuring a fair opportunity for the Assessee to present their case and have the issues decided afresh by the Ld. CIT(A) in accordance with the law and the cited judgments.