Iqbal Ahmed , Mawana vs Assessee

1 ITA 5267/Del/2012 Iqbal Ahmed Vs. ITO

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH "C" NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT : JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA no. 5267/Del/2012 A.Y. 2005-06 Iqbal Ahmed, Vs. Income-tax Officer, 2223, Mohalla Kalyan Singh, Ward 1(3), Meerut. Atora Road, Mawana. PAN: AGZPA 4331 M

( Appellant ) ( Respondent )

Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri P. Dam Kanunjna Sr. DR

Date of hearing : 02-03-2015 Date of order : 04-03-2015.

ORDER

PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M:-

This appeal, preferred by the assessee, is directed against the order dated 7-9-2012, passed by the CIT(Appeals), Meerut, in appeal no. 570/07- 08, relating to A.Y. 2005-06.

2. None put in appearance at the hearing. The adjournment application moved on behalf of the assessee has been rejected for want of sufficient cause. We proceed to dispose of the assessee's appeal, ex parte, qua the assessee, on merits and in that process we have heard ld. DR and perused the material available on record.

2 ITA 5267/Del/2012 Iqbal Ahmed Vs. ITO

3. The assessee has, inter alia, taken following ground of appeal:

"The Ld. CIT(A) has not justified in refusing to admit the appeal because assessee's father was seriously ill and was admitted in Apollo hospital in Chennai and the assessee has not received any order u/s 143(3), but he received notice u/s 221(1) along with challan. Therefore, the assessee obtained certified copy from AO and filed an appeal before CIT(A) in time. Therefore, Ld. CIT(A) has not justified to dismiss the appeal on the ground of late filing of appeal."

4. The ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order has dismissed assessee's appeal, inter alia, by observing as under:

"I find that the AO passed his order on 22-8-2007. The order admittedly was served by speed post. The appellant himself has mentioned so under Ground no. 3. The reason which the appellant has stated for the delay in filing the appeal which was actually filed on \6-2-2008 is that the assessee was in Chennai for the last six months and when he came back to Meerut, he immediately opened the envelope and filed the appeal.

In my considered view, there was a valid service of order dated 22-8-2007 which has not been disputed by the appellant. The reason for delay cited by the appellant is not convincing. On the facts, I am not satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the stipulated period. The appeal is, therefore, not admitted."

5. Having heard ld. DR we find that assessee's plea for late filing of the appeal before ld. CIT(A) was that he was in Chennai for the last six months as his father was seriously ill and was admitted in Apollo Hospital. Considering the entire conspectus of the case we are of the opinion that assessee had reasonably explained the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before 3 ITA 5267/Del/2012 Iqbal Ahmed Vs. ITO

the ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of first appellate authority with a direction to decide the appeal on merit by passing a reasoned order, after providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We order accordingly.

6. In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 04-03-2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (KUL BHARAT ) ( S.V. MEHROTRA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 04-03-2015. MP: Copy to : 1. Assessee 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR