Hindustan Marble & Granite Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore)
ITAT Bangalore held that delay of 288 days committed as assessment order mailed to email ID of erstwhile employee and hence delay in filing of an appeal condoned. Matter remanded back to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Facts- A search and seizure action u/s. 132 of the Act was conducted at the office premises of the assessee and certain incriminating material were found and seized from the said premises. AO completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153D of the Act on 26.09.2021 determining the assessee’s total income at Rs.5,56,59,610/- and also initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271AAB of the Act. Aggrieved by the assessment completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A).
CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as the same was filed with a delay of 288 days.
Conclusion- Held that an application for condonation of delay was filed before the ld. CIT(A) stating that the assessment order was mailed to the email ID of erstwhile employee, who resigned from the firm on 26th June, 2018. The assessee came to know the fact only when they received the recovery notice dated 11.11.2022 and immediately thereafter took necessary steps to file appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and finally filed the appeal on 23.01.2023. In our opinion this is a fit case to condone the short delay of 288 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the delay is condoned.
