Ahura Welding Electrode Manufactures Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Chennai)
The Chennai ITAT considered the assessee’s appeal for AY 2015-16 arising from the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), dated 24-08-2023 against the assessment framed under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act on 28-12-2017.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee’s first appeal before the CIT(A) had been filed with a delay of 23 days. The CIT(A) declined to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal without examining the issues on merits.
Before the Tribunal, the assessee submitted that it had filed a rectification application under Section 154 on 08-02-2017, which remained pending for disposal. According to the assessee, it was under the impression that the appeal on the remaining issues was to be filed after the rectification order. The Revenue sought dismissal of the appeal.
After considering the submissions, the Tribunal observed that the delay in filing the first appeal was only 23 days. It further noted that the pending rectification application under Section 154 had a bearing on the assessee’s grievance. The Tribunal held that, in these circumstances, the CIT(A) ought to have condoned the delay and adjudicated the appeal on merits.
Accordingly, the Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits without raising the issue of delay. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 arises out of an order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] on 24-08-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 28-12-2017. Upon perusal of impugned order, it could be seen that the assessee’s first appeal was filed with a delay of 23 days. The Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal for want of condonation of delay without going into the merits of the case.
2. The Ld. AR, submitted that the assessee preferred a rectification application u/s 154 on 08-02-2017 which was pending for disposal. Till that time, the assessee was under impression that the appeal was to be filed on balance issues after rectification order. The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of appeal.
3. We find that there was minor delay of 23 days in filing of first appeal. The assessee had preferred a rectification application u/s 154 which would have bearing on the grievance of the assessee. Therefore, Ld. CIT(A) should have condoned the delay and adjudicated the appeal on merits. Accordingly, we restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication de novo on merits without raising the issue of delay.
4. The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 07th February, 2024.
