The Pune Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) condoned the delay of 180 days for delay in filing appeal due to pending cases in civil courts and financial struggle of the assessee.
Abhijit Uttamrao Deshmukh (assessee) individual not filed his Income Tax Return (ITR) and the Assessing Officer ( AO ) noted that the Assessee received an amount of Rs. 10 Crores in transaction of land. Therefore, the AO reopened the assessment proceedings and added Rs. 10 Crore to the total income.
The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals)[CIT(A)]. In spite of the submission of additional evidence, the CIT(A) refused to accept it and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The CIT(A) refused to condone a delay of 180 days.
Law and Procedure for Filing of Appeals
Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee filed an appeal before ITAT. The counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause for not filing an appeal within time.
The counsel also submitted that the assessee had pending cases on civil courts including the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). The counsel also submitted that the assessee’s parents were seriously ill and also stated that the assessee faced financial problems. Therefore, the counsel requested the tribunal to set aside the order and further prayed to condone the delay 180 days.
On the other hand, the counsel for the revenue relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and sought to dismiss the appeal.
The Tribunal observed that the assessee filed a paper book and additional evidence. The tribunal also observed that the assessment order was passed in the absence of the assessee. The tribunal further observed that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay.
The bench comprising R. K. Panda (Vice President) and Vinay Bhamore (Judicial Member) held that the CIT(A) was erred in not condoning the delay of 180 days in filing the appeal. The tribunal also set aside the order passed by the CIT(A) in the interest of Justice.
The tribunal also directed the assessee to produce additional documents without taking unnecessary adjournment. Thereby partly allowed the appeal of the assessee.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
