2016 (10) TMI 1392 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay - Appeal filled as time barred by 26 days - CIT(Appeals) instead of considering the submissions of the assessee found that appeal of the assessee is late by 26 days and since no application for condonation of delay has been filed therefore, appeal of the assessee has been dismissed - HELD THAT - Matter requires re-consideration at the level of the ld. CIT(Appeals). CIT(Appeals) noted the facts of the case and written submission of the assessee in the impugned order but did not pass any order on merit. He has held that appeal is time barred by 26 days and in absence of application for condonation of delay, appeal was dismissed. There is no fact mentioned in the impugned order if any opportunity was given to the assessee to file application for condonation of delay in this regard. Further, there appears justification in the contention of ld. counsel for the assessee that appeal before ld. CIT(Appeals) was not time barred by 26 days. CIT(Appeals), before considering the appeal to be time barred should have given sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the time barring matter and should have given oppor tunity to the assessee to file application for condonation of delay in this regard. The order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) therefore, vitiate due to these reasons. Set aside the orders of the ld. CIT(Appeals) and restore the matter in issue to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with direction to re-decide appeal of the assessee by giving opportunity to the assessee to file application for condonation of delay.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order under section 154 of the Act and addition of Rs. 3,76,202; Late filing of appeal by 26 days; Opportunity for condonation of delay not provided; Appeal dismissal by ld. CIT(Appeals) without considering merit; Request for remand to ld. CIT(Appeals for condonation of delay.

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal was against the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) regarding assessment year 2007-08. The assessee contested the order and the addition of Rs. 3,76,202, seeking relief under section 154 of the Act. However, the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal as late by 26 days without providing an opportunity for condonation of delay, despite the written submission of the assessee being on record. The counsel for the assessee argued that the appeal was not time-barred by 26 days as claimed, and requested a remand to the ld. CIT(Appeals) for the opportunity to file an application for condonation of delay.

Upon reviewing the submissions, the Appellate Tribunal found that the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not address the merits of the case and dismissed the appeal solely on the grounds of being time-barred without giving the assessee a chance to explain or seek condonation of delay. The Tribunal noted that no information or opportunity was provided to the assessee to file for condonation of delay, and there was no mention of any such opportunity in the impugned order. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee's contention that sufficient opportunity should have been given before deeming the appeal time-barred.

Consequently, the Appellate Tribunal set aside the orders of the ld. CIT(Appeals) and directed a re-decision on the appeal, emphasizing the need for the ld. CIT(Appeals) to allow the assessee to file an application for condonation of delay and to decide the appeal in accordance with the law, ensuring a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to be heard. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was remanded for a fresh consideration by the ld. CIT(Appeals).

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal intervened to rectify the procedural irregularity by ensuring that the assessee is afforded a fair opportunity to present their case and seek condonation of delay, emphasizing the importance of due process in tax matters.