AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This is a batch of two appeals of the same assessee for Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2016-17. ITA No.2893/Del/2026 (AY 2015-16) arises from order dated 20.01.2026, through order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), by NFAC. ITA No.2894/Del/2026 arises from order dated 20.01.2026, u/s 250 of the Act by NFAC.
In ITA No.2893/Del/2026, it is seen that the Ld. CIT(A) has mentioned in para 2 at page 2 of his order that the delay in filing of the appeal (about 10 to 12 days) was not condoned in spite of the fact that the assessee had mentioned in Form 35 that there were medical reasons for the said delay. However, the Ld. CIT(A) then proceeded ahead to decide the case on merits also and confirmed the addition of Rs.70,00,000/- made u/s 69A of the Act, though in an ex parte manner. Needless to say, the appeal of the assessee was rejected.
In ITA No.2894/Del/2026, it is seen that the Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex parte order confirming the action of Ld. AO in terms of an addition of Rs.130,00,000/- made u/s 69A of the Act. Since the assessee was unresponsive, hence, the order was passed against the assessee in an ex parte manner.
The aggrieved assessee has challenged these two appellate orders on merits as well as on grounds of denial of opportunity.
Before us the Ld. AR stated that for AY 2015-16, a short delay was not condoned in spite of fact that the assessee was prevented by medical reasons from filing the appeal on time. For AY 2016-17 and even the other appeal, it was mentioned that due to a communication gap between the assessee and his tax consultant, timely compliance could not be made before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR prayed for one more opportunity to present the facts before the authorities below.
The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard the rival submissions and have gone through the records before us. It is seen that on the one hand the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in ITA No.2893/Del/2026 and in spite of that has adjudicated on merit, that too in an ex parte manner. In ITA No.2894/Del/2026 also the impugned order is extremely cryptic and has been passed in an ex parte manner. It is felt that since this is a fact-based case hence it is not possible to adjudicate in these two matters until and unless proper fact finding has been done by lower levels. Accordingly, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned orders for both the years and thereby remand the same to the file of Ld. CIT(A). We condone the delay in ITA No.2893/Del/2026 and remit the matter for a decision on merits. Similarly for ITA No.2894/Del/2026 the matter is remanded back for a decision on merit by the Ld. CIT(A).
In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes.