AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER RENU JAUHRI :
The above captioned appeals are preferred by the assessee against the orders dated 17.09.2025 and 19.09.2025, passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, New Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as, “Act”] for A.Y. 2020-21.
At the outset, Ld. AR submitted that both the orders of Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte. In the appeal against the assessment order dated 01.09.2022, Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay of 164 days in filing of appeal and dismissed the same in limine. As regards the appeal against the penalty order u/s 270A, Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly observed that no appeal was filed against the assessment order implying that the assessee had accepted the addition. As no compliance was made by the assessee, during appellate proceedings, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal against penalty also ex-parte.
In view of above, Ld. AR has requested that both the appeals may be remanded to Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. Ld. DR has not objected to the said proposition.
After hearing both the parties and considering the material placed before us, we are of the view that the delay of 164 days in filing of appeal before Ld. CIT(A) against the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B dated 01.09.2022, deserves to be condoned in the light of explanation submitted by the assessee.
Accordingly, we restore back both the appeals to Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be vigilant and make requisite compliance before Ld. CIT(A).
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.