Delay in filling appeal before the CIT(A) by 2929 days can be condoned by CIT (A) if there exists a genuine reasons: ITAT Ahmedabad
Here is an interesting case before ITAT Ahmedabad wherein delay in filling appeal is condoned by CIT (A)
The case detail is as under:
PRAKASHKUMAR AMBALAL PATEL VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MEHSANA, No.- ITA No. 950/Ahd/2023
Dated.- January 17, 2024
The case detail is as under:
In this case, Assessee filed return of income for assessment year 2014-15 on 09-10-2014 declaring total income at Rs. 4,90,980/-. The said return of income was processed by the CPC determining the total income at Rs. 37,62,400/- and a demand of Rs. 11,54,740/- was raised vide intimation order u/s. 143(1) of the Act dated 02-07-2015. The CPC Bangalore has added a sum of Rs. 29,94,456/- to the total income as declared in the ITR by the assessee as contract income under other revenue as per the intimation order u/s. 143(1) dated 02-07-2015.
4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the basis of delay in filing the appeal of 2929 days for which the assessee has stated that the reasons that the intimation was not served to the assessee but the assessee came to know about the intimation when the action of demand for recovery came to the knowledge of the assessee. The assessee filed rectification request to the CPC but it was not processed by the CPC and the said rectification jurisdiction was transferred to a different jurisdictional Assessing Officer. On receipt of demand letter dated 02-08-2023, the assessee filed rectification application to jurisdictional Assessing Officer but the Assessing Officer rejected the said rectification application and suggested to file appeal as per letter dated 07- 08-2023
Reason Thus, the ld. A.R. submitted that the delay is due to the reasonable cause of bonafide belief about mistake which is rectifiable u/s. 154 and without any malafide intention to defraud Revenue.
ITAT has held as under:
It is pertinent to note that though the delay is that of 2929 days but whether the intimation was rightly served to the assessee was not denied by the Revenue. In fact, the assessee has taken a measure of filing rectification application u/s. 154 and the same was also not entertained. The Assessing Officer has also suggested to file appeal and therefore the assessee after exhausting all the remedies has filed the appeal before the CIT(A). Thus, the delay in filing the appeal was not deliberate. These aspects have not been taken into account by the CIT(A). In fact, the assessee has filed the detailed affidavit explaining the delay before the CIT(A). This was also totally ignored. Therefore, we are condoning the delay in respect of the appeal filed before the CIT(A), the remaining matter to the file of CIT(A) for proper adjudication of the issues contested by the assessee in the appeal filed before the CIT(A). Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice.
The copy of the order is as under: