Facts of the Case

The assessee, Mohammed Ashfaq Ansari, filed an appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15 against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre dated 29.02.2024. The appeal before the Tribunal was delayed by 232 days. The assessee explained the reasons for the delay, which were found to be bona fide and genuine. The CIT(A) had earlier disposed of the appeal without adjudicating the merits on account of non-compliance by the assessee during appellate proceedings.



Issues Involved

Whether the delay of 232 days in filing the appeal deserved condonation, whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an order without adjudicating the merits of the case, and whether the matter required restoration to the CIT(A) in the interest of justice.


Petitioner’s Arguments

The assessee submitted that the delay in filing the appeal was due to bona fide reasons and requested condonation. It was further contended that the CIT(A) passed the appellate order without considering the merits of the case solely on the ground of non-compliance, and that the assessee should be granted one more opportunity to present the case on merits.


Respondent’s Arguments

The Revenue did not appear before the Tribunal to contest the appeal.


Court Order / Findings

The ITAT Patna condoned the delay of 232 days after being satisfied that the reasons explained by the assessee were bona fide and genuine. The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) disposed of the appeal without adjudicating the merits due to non-compliance by the assessee. Considering the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal held that the ends of justice would be served by granting the assessee one more opportunity. Accordingly, the matter was restored to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal afresh on merits after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.


Important Clarification

The Tribunal clarified that appellate authorities are expected to adjudicate appeals on merits wherever possible and that dismissal of appeals without consideration of substantive issues, solely on account of non-compliance, should be avoided when interests of justice warrant further opportunity.


Final Outcome

The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, the ex parte order passed by the CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after granting reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

 

Link to download order 
https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1769072739_MOHAMMEDASHFAQANSARIARARIAVS.INCOMETAXDEPARTMENTDELHIDELHI.pdf 

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.