Ram Rati vs ITO Ward-5 Rohtak

PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Ld. NFAC)”] vide order dated 23-07-2024 pertaining to A.Y. 2013-14 arising out the assessment order dated 26-03-2022 u/s. 147 r.w.s.144 read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (in short ‘the Act’)

The assessee raised the following grounds in the appeal:

The appeal is time barred by 431 days. In the condonation application the assessee stated that the appeal should have filed within 60 days but filed 431 days of delay. He stated that appeal could not filed within time due to family problems and illness of the assessee. In the support of the application the assessee has also filed affidavit. The assessee has shown the sufficient cause not to file the appeal within time. We find merit of the contention of the assessee, and condoned the delay in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed his return of income for the A.Y.2013-14 on 30-03-2014 declaring total income of Rs. 1,99,170/-. Thereafter the assessment was reopened u/s 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 30-03-2021. The assessing Officer has certain information in his possession that assessee has made huge deposit of Rs.1,20,19,373/- in the bank account no.073201503304 maintained with ICICI Bank. The assessee did not file the return in the compliance of the notice under section 148 of the Act. Again, notice under section 142(1) of the act was issued to the assessee. In the compliance of the notice the assessee only submitted the copy of the bank statement. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act after making the addition of Rs.1,20,19,373/-under section 69 of the Act.

Aggrieved the order of the ld. AO the assessee preferred the appeal before the Ld. NFAC who vide his order dated 23-07-2024 without admitting the appeal dismissed the appeal on the point of the delay. Being aggrieved the order of the Ld. NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

The Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the opportunity of being heard was not provided by the lower authorities. The appeal should be heard on merit and delay should be condoned. The Learned authorized representative for Department of Revenue submitted that departmental authorities have passed reasoned orders. He also submitted that the assessee has not shown the sufficient cause to condone the delay. The appeal was rightly rejected without admitting.

We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessee was filed the appeal with a delay of 130 days. Ld. NFAC relying the various judgments dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay treated time barred.

The assessee has filed the application for condonation the delay in filing the appeal. The assessee has shown the sufficient cause not to file the appeal with in time. The Ld. NFAC should have condoned the delay in filing the appeal and should have heard the appeal on merit because the assessee has shown the sufficient cause not to file the appeal with in time. Thus, keeping in view, the entire aspects of the matter, we condoned the delay in preferring the appeal before the Ld. NFAC having been satisfied with the explanation so rendered by the assessee before the said authority. The order passed by the Ld. NFAC is setting side, the issue to the file is restored before the Ld. NFAC who decide the matter to the file after giving the opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the appellate authority. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

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