2023 (3) TMI 1380 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay - delay of about 80 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal - Whether assessee failed to show reasonable cause for condoning the delay? - HELD THAT - As assessee has shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay. Appeal fees was deposited on 08/12/2022, father of assessee died on 09/12/2022. This fact is not in dispute as the ld. representative is one of the leading counsel in Surat Bench. It is matter of record this appeal was filed only on 02/02/2023. There is no intentional or deliberate delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. It is settled law that when technical consideration and cause of substantial justice are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice may be preferred. Thus, keeping in view such principle, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Now adverting to the merit of the case. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of assessee without discussing the grounds of appeal in an ex parte proceeding - As recorded while considering the condonation of delay, assessee submitted that he was not informed by his earlier representative and the assessee is not well-versed with the faceless hearing. The notice if any was not served to the assessee directly rather may have been sent on e-mail on his earlier representative who has not informed the assessee The assessee remained unrepresented before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, restore the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue on merit. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant and to make compliance in time and without any further delay.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, condonation of delay, and dismissal of the appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in an ex parte proceeding without discussing the merits of the case.

Delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal:
The appellant submitted that there was a delay of about 80 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal due to various reasons, including the appellant not being well-versed with the faceless procedure and the unfortunate demise of the authorized representative's father. The appellant contended that the delay was not intentional or deliberate but due to circumstances explained. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions, found that there was sufficient cause for condonation of delay and that the delay was not intentional. The Tribunal emphasized the principle of substantial justice and condoned the delay.

Dismissal of the appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in an ex parte proceeding:
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the appellant without discussing the grounds of appeal in an ex parte proceeding. The Tribunal noted that the appellant was not informed by the earlier representative and was not well-versed with the faceless hearing process. As the appellant remained unrepresented before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to restore the appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for adjudication on merit. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was directed to grant a fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant. The appellant was also instructed to be more vigilant and make compliance without delay.

Separate Judgement:
In a separate judgment for the appeal related to the Assessment Year 2011-12, the Tribunal found that the facts were similar to the appeal for the previous year. Since the delay in filing the appeal for the previous year was condoned and the case was restored for fresh adjudication, the Tribunal decided to restore this appeal as well to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for similar findings. Both appeals of the appellant were allowed for statistical purposes only.

This judgment by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT SURAT addressed the issues of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, condonation of delay, and the dismissal of the appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in an ex parte proceeding. The Tribunal found sufficient cause for condonation of delay due to the appellant's circumstances and emphasized the principle of substantial justice. The appeal was restored to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for adjudication on merit, with directions for a fair opportunity of hearing. The separate judgment for the appeal related to the Assessment Year 2011-12 followed a similar decision based on the principles of consistency.