AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM:
The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 11.11.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out of the Penalty Order dated 31.05.2018 passed by the ACIT, Circl-1(1), Gurgaon (hereinafter referred to as ‘the ld. AO’) under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for Assessment Year 2015-16.
We have heard the parties and perused the record. We observe that there was a delay of 1738 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A) in the penalty proceedings. In the quantum appeal, the delay was condoned and the issue was restored to the file of the AO by the Tribunal by and under the order dated 27.08.2025 in ITA No.1237/Del/2025. While condoning the delay, the Tribunal observed as follows:-
“7.The AR submitted that the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee without going into the ground of the delay. The assessee has given a sufficient cause for not to filing the appeal within time. He further submitted that assessee has no knowledge about the assessment order and came to know about the passing assessment order as well as penalty order immediately, send a letter to the assessee officer on 22.01.2019. The Ld. NFAC should have condoned the delay and appeal be heard on merit. The ld. AR has also submitted that the assessee company director was non residence of India and company was registered a temporary address at New Delhi but the business operations was never carried on at the said address. The business operations were carried on at Didarganj, Patna. The assessee not issued any communication and the AO passed the exparte assessment without being heard the assessee.”
The Appellant is not a resident of India and there was no deficiency on the part of the assessee which is appearing from the written submissions.
The Ld. DR has no objection to the assessee being given another opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A).
Under these facts and circumstances of the matter, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the AO for deciding on the penalty afresh upon considering the outcome of the quantum appeal; upon considering the material on record and any other evidence that the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing and upon affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.