The Delhi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) condoned a 1030-day delay in filing an appeal due to the assessee’s lack of knowledge about the e-filing system.
Yadram,appellant-assessee,challenged the order dated 21.02.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [CIT(A)/NFAC] Assessment Year(AY) 2013-14 in proceedings under section 250 of Act.
In the Income Tax Act, the CIT(A) hears appeals against assessment orders and decides if the order is correct. If the taxpayer is not satisfied, they can appeal to the ITAT. The NFAC, introduced for faceless processing, aims to make the appeal process more efficient and transparent by reducing delays and human interaction.
Understanding Common Mode of Tax Evasion with Practical Scenarios, Click Here
The Tribunal, after hearing both parties, noted that the CIT(A)/NFAC had refused to condone a 1030-day delay in filing the appeal, which was submitted on 30.01.2019 against the assessment order dated 15.03.2016. The appellant had filed the appeal physically but it was not considered because it was not an e-appeal, which was submitted later due to a lack of knowledge about the e-filing system.
Condonation of delay in the Income Tax Act, 1961 allows authorities to accept a delayed filing or appeal if the taxpayer provides a valid reason. Under Section 253, the Appellate Tribunal and under Section 264, the Commissioner can condone delays if the taxpayer proves there was a reasonable cause, such as lack of knowledge, illness, or other valid circumstances. The decision to condone the delay is at the discretion of the relevant authority, but it must be supported by a credible explanation.
Understanding Common Mode of Tax Evasion with Practical Scenarios, Click Here
A single member bench comprising Satbeer Singh Godara(Judicial Member) found this to be a valid reason. Since the CIT(A)/NFAC had not decided the appeal on its merits, the appellate tribunal decided to condone the delay and send the case back for fresh adjudication, with the taxpayer responsible for proving all relevant facts within three opportunities.
In short,the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
