2021 (9) TMI 527 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay - Appeal filled to wrong jurisdictional CIT(A) - sufficient cause of delay - HELD THAT - There was no delay on the part of the assessee in filing the appeal against the order passed by the A.O. on 17/03/2016 as the assessee had filed the appeal on 21/3/2016 i.e. well within the stipulated period, although, inadvertently, the assessee had filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A)-3, Jaipur instead of CIT(A)-1, Jaipur but later on the said mistake was also rectified by moving an application by the assessee which was allowed by the concerned CIT(A)-3, Jaipur and necessary order in this respect by transferring the appeal to the jurisdictional CIT(A)-1, Jaipur was also passed. As per AR that he has opted for VSVS Scheme-19 and filed Form No. 1 and 2 and the department has also issued Form No. 3. However, the benefit of VSVS-19 cannot be taken by the assessee as there is a condition precedent that the appeal filed by the assessee should be pending at the time of obtaining the scheme. Since the appeal filed by the assessee has been wrongly dismissed by the NFAC, therefore, considering the totality of facts and circumstances as narrated above and also considering the principles laid down in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag Anr. Vs Mst. Katiji and others 1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME COURT wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the expression 'Sufficient Cause' employed by the legislature is adequately elastic to enable the Courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner to sub-serves the ends of justice that being the life-purpose of the existence of the institution of Courts. We condone the delay if any in filing the appeal - we restore the matter back to the ld. CIT(A), NFAC for deciding the appeal on merits after giving due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Timeliness of filing the appeal before the Faceless Appeal Centre.
2. Consideration of evidence and submission by the assessee.
3. Addition of a specific amount in the assessment.
4. Application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
5. Eligibility for VSVS Scheme-19 benefits.

Issue 1: Timeliness of Filing the Appeal
The appeal was filed against the order of the ld. CIT(A) for the A.Y. 2013-14. The assessee claimed that the appeal was filed within the stipulated period, albeit initially filed before the wrong authority. The appeal was later transferred to the correct jurisdiction. The NFAC dismissed the appeal citing delay, but the documents presented by the assessee showed that the appeal was filed promptly after the assessment order. The Tribunal found no delay in filing the appeal and concluded that the matter should be reconsidered on its merits by the ld. CIT(A), NFAC.

Issue 2: Consideration of Evidence and Submission
The assessee contended that the ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal as belated without considering the reply and evidences filed. The Tribunal reviewed all documents provided by the assessee, including the application for transfer of appeal to the correct jurisdiction. The Tribunal observed that the NFAC did not consider the documents submitted by the assessee, leading to the incorrect dismissal of the appeal. The Tribunal directed the ld. CIT(A), NFAC to reevaluate the appeal on its merits after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

Issue 3: Addition of Specific Amount in Assessment
The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition of a specific amount in the assessment without considering the written submission filed earlier by the assessee. The Tribunal did not delve deeply into this issue in the judgment but focused on the procedural aspects related to the timeliness of the appeal filing and subsequent dismissal.

Issue 4: Application for Condonation of Delay
The assessee filed an application seeking condonation of delay due to the initial filing before the wrong authority, which was later rectified. The Tribunal, after examining the circumstances and the documents provided, found that there was no deliberate delay or malafide intent on the part of the assessee. Citing principles of substantial justice and technical considerations, the Tribunal condoned any delay in filing the appeal and directed the ld. CIT(A), NFAC to reconsider the appeal on its merits.

Issue 5: Eligibility for VSVS Scheme-19 Benefits
The assessee mentioned opting for the VSVS Scheme-19 and submitting the required forms, but the appeal's dismissal by the NFAC affected the eligibility for scheme benefits. The Tribunal considered the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding sufficient cause for delay and substantial justice. It concluded that there was a reasonable cause for condoning any delay in filing the appeal, emphasizing the importance of deciding matters on their merits after due consideration.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes only and instructed the ld. CIT(A), NFAC to reconsider the case on its merits, emphasizing the importance of providing a fair opportunity to the assessee for a proper hearing.

This detailed analysis of the legal judgment covers all the issues involved and provides a comprehensive understanding of the Tribunal's decision and the reasoning behind it.