AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER AMITABH SHUKLA, AM,
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre/Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)] dated 20.06.2025 arising out of assessment order dated 23.03.2024 passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2016-17. The word ‘Act’ herein this order would mean Income Tax Act, 1961.
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
1)That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in rejecting the appeal on grounds of delay without appreciating the reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal.
2)That the appellant had submitted a detailed explanation supported by documentary evidence for the delay, which was due to circumstances beyond the appellant's control, and hence deserved to be condoned in the interest of justice.
3)That the learned CIT(A) failed to exercise discretion judiciously and mechanically rejected the condonation petition, thereby depriving the appellant of an opportunity to be heard on merits.
4)That the rejection of the appeal solely on the technical grounds, without considering the merits of the case, is against the principles of justice.
The only issue raised by the assessee, who is a former defence officer is that the ld. CIT(A) in its case did not condone the delay in filing of the appeal and dismissed it without any valid justification. As per brief factual matrix of the case, an ex-parte order under section 147 r.w.s. 144 was passed by the ld. AO determining short term capital gains of Rs.66,06,750/- on account of sale of immovable property. The assessee filed an appeal before the ld First Appellate Authority committing delay of 201 days on account of self-illness, etc. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal holding that there was no justified ground for the delay.
The ld. Counsel for the assessee argued that the assessee is a former defence officer of advanced age and suffering from several ailments. The ld. Counsel requested that the matter be remitted to the AO and that full compliance shall now be made.
Upon consideration of the matter, we have noted that the assessee has not had fair chance of demonstrating before the lower authorities truthfulness of facts. We are conscious of the fact that no litigant benefits by willingly delaying its matters. Be that as it may be in the interest of justice, we set-aside the order of the lower authorities and remit the matter to the file of the ld. AO for assessment denovo after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and in accordance with law. The assessee shall comply with all the statutory notices and any non-compliance would be adversely viewed.
In thee result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.