Bhupendrabhai Punjabhai Patel Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
In the case of Bhupendrabhai Punjabhai Patel vs. ACIT, the ITAT Ahmedabad addressed an appeal challenging the CIT(A)’s decision from October 6, 2023, which had rejected the appellant’s claim for a Section 54F deduction of Rs. 75,80,923. The appeal was delayed by 125 days due to the appellant’s difficulty with technology and missed notifications. The appellant argued that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without considering the merits, solely based on non-compliance. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) failed to review the merits of the case as required under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, which mandates that the CIT(A) must dispose of the matter with a written order and reasons on the dispute raised. Consequently, the ITAT directed the CIT(A) to reconsider the appeal, ensuring a fair adjudication as per the legal provisions.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short ‘the CIT(A)’) dated 06.10.2023 for the Assessment Year 2016-17.
2. The assessee has raised the following grounds in this appeal:
“1. The Learned Assessing Officer erred in law and on facts of the case in rejecting the claim of the Appellant for deduction us. 54F of the IT. Act, 1951 for a sum of Rs. 75,80,923/-. The Learned CIT(Appeals) confirmed the same by passing an ex-parte order. It is submitted that the Appellant was prevented by sufficient chase in not being able to file his written submissions before CIT (Appeals), and hence, the matter may please be restored to the file of learned CIT (Appeals) for adjudication denovo,
2. Without prejudice to Ground No.1 above, the Learned Assessing Officer erred in rejecting the claim of the Appellant for deduction u/s 54F for Rs. 75,80,923/-and Learned CTT (Appeals) erred in confirming the said disallowance. It is submitted that Appellant is entitled to deduction u/s 54F for Rs. 75,80,923/- and the same be allowed to him.”
3. There is a delay of 125 days in filing of this appeal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reason for delay. It has been submitted that the assessee was not a techno savvy person and the notices sent by the Ld. CIT(A) on his email id and also on the departmental portal had escaped his notice which led to non-compliance before the Ld. CIT(A). For the same reason, there was a delay in filing of present appeal as well. Considering the fact that there was no compliance of the assessee before the CIT(A) and the reason as explained, the delay in filing the present appeal is condoned.
