AVVL Infracon Pvt. Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)

PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM

The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.09.2024 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi (hereinafter referred as ‘the CIT(A)’) arising out of the Assessment Order passed by Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), New Delhi, dated 25.12.2019 under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2012-13.

The appeal is barred by 398 days. The order was passed by NFAC on 25.09.2024 received by the assessee on the same date is under challenge before us. An application for condonation of delay of appeal along with an affidavit affirmed by one Jasveen Kaur dated 08.01.2026 have been filed before us in support of delay of 368 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal.

The explanation given by the assessee is that the Director Shri Tejpal Singh expired on 24.07.2023 who was looking after the litigation of the company and the other Director namely Jasveen Kaur, who has affirmed the instant application did not have any information about the assessment proceedings as she did not check the portal. Only after the receipt of demand notice, the efforts were undertaken to file the appeal and the order passed by the Ld. First Appellate Authority was provided to the Ld. counsel appearing for the assessee on 09.12.2015 and subsequently, the appeal was filed before us. Such explanation rendered by the assessee seems to be genuine and therefore, the delay is condoned.

In spite of notices having been sent to the assessee on many occasions by the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not appear and therefore, the appeal was disposed of ex-parte confirming the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer. Thus, at the end of the day, it is evident that the disposal of the appeal was made only basis of the records available with the Ld. First Appellate Authority and no proper representation were made by the assessee before him. Therefore, this Bench, in order to prevent the miscarriage of the justice is of the opinion to dispose of this appeal by remitting the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for consideration of the same afresh upon granting of opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.