AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM:
The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 29.07.2025 for the Assessment Year 2018-19.
At the time of hearing, we observed that there is a delay of 198 days in filing the appeal before the ITAT. In condonation of delay application, assessee submitted that there has been an inadvertent delay on the part of the assessee as the director of the company Mr. Manoj Sethi and his wife are two partners in the firm and Mr. Manoj was suffering from severe lung infection and also dealt with arthritis and was under medical advice for complete bed rest from July 2025 to April 2026. In this regard, medical certificate of the assessee as well as copy of affidavit is placed on record. It is submitted in the application that due to that reason, assessee could not file the appeal in time and prayed to condone the delay.
After hearing both the parties and perusing the condonation of delay application, we are condoning the delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT.
At the time of hearing, ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal in limine only on the ground of delay in filing without duly appreciating that the assessee had shown reasonable and sufficient cause for the delay. He further submitted that the ld. CIT (A) had not adjudicated the issues on its merits. He submitted that ld. CIT (A) ought to have dealt with the grounds of appeal substantively even if the delay was not condoned or at least provided a detailed finding on the sufficiency of the cause of delay. He submitted that there are reasons for assessee for not appearing before the first appellate authority. Accordingly, he prayed that this issue may be remitted back to ld. CIT(A, after condoning the delay before the ld. CIT (A), with the prayer to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee and relied on the orders of the lower authorities.
Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground of delay in filing the appeal. In the interest of justice, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT (A). In our considered view, assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard on merit. Therefore, we direct ld. CIT (A) to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issues on merit as per law. We also direct assessee through his counsel to make proper submissions and appear before the ld.CIT (A) on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.