Rohit Gulati vs DC/AC Circle 3(1)

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal preferred by the assessee against the order dated 11.03.2025 of the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A)-1 Visakhapatanam (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order No: ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1074363748(1) arising out of the order dated 31.06.2018 u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY: 2017-18.

On hearing both sides we find that there was a delay of 273 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal and at the same time we find that the appeal of the assesse were dismissed by ld. CIT(A) as there was a delay of over 2017 days in filing the appeal.

Ld. DR has vehemently relied the impugned order and findings. Ld. AR has submitted that identical issue for AY: 2012-13 & 2015-16, relating to disallowance of deduction u/s 80IC/80IB were decided against the assessee and the appeal proceedings were pending before the Ld. Tax authorities wherein substantial resources of the assesse were consumed and there was a demand of over Rs.1 crores for AY: 2012-13. Thus, assesse being a non-resident was unable to pursue its case in India for want of resources. Ld. Counsel has also pointed out that out of 10 years from AY: 2010-11 to 2019-20 deduction was allowed by CPC for 8 years.

After taking into consideration the facts and circumstances as pointed out we consider it appropriate case where assesse be given an opportunity to contest on merit, but subject to payment of Rs.10,000/-. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and the issue on merits as well as law are restore to the files of ld. CIT(A) to give fresh opportunity of hearing to the assesse to decide the appeal afresh. The assesse shall deposit Rs.10,000/-with Prime Minister Relief Fund and deposit the challan of the same before the ld. CIT(A) in a period of 90 days.