Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Lucknow

Akshat Agarwal, Bareilly vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bareily on 10 May, 2018

            IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                LUCKNOW BENCH"SMC", LUCKNOW

          BEFORE SHRI. T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
      AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY,JUDICIAL MEMBER

                        ITA No.384/LKW/2017
                       Assessment Year:2007-08

Akshat Agarwal                        v.      Income Tax Officer
35-E/1B, Ram Brij Times                       Ward 1(1)
Bareilly                                      Bareilly
TAN/PAN:AGGPA3039F
(Appellant)                                   (Respondent)

     Appellant by:             Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.A.
     Respondent by:            Shri Kumar, D.R.
     Date of hearing:          10 05 2018
     Date of pronouncement:    10 05 2018


                               ORDER

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, J.M:

This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the ld. CIT(A), Bareilly dated 30/6/2016 as per the grounds of appeal appearing on record.

2. This appeal has been filed by the assessee wherein there is a delay of 333 days and it is pleaded by the assessee by a petition for condonation of delay that the assessee was suffering from various medical ailments and delay caused was unintentional and for the reason beyond the control of the assessee. To substantiate, assessee has annexed medical certificate which put forth that assessee was under

treatment and it tallies with the condonation petition filed by the assessee. Furthermore, an affidavit to that effect is also filed before us confirming that assessee deponent was suffering from frequent ITA No.384/LKW/2017Page 2 of 3 gastroenteritis with hepatitis and was undergoing treatment at Dr. Gopi Polyclinic and Research Centre, Rampur Bagh, Bareilly. We find the reasons for delay convincing and that it was not something which was predetermined, rather it was beyond the control of the assessee and taking the affidavit and medical certificate filed before us, we condone the delay.

3. At the time of hearing of the case, the ld. A.R. of the assessee stated that before the ld. CIT(A) appeal was filed beyond the period of limitation and the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed it on the ground of limitation and delay of filing the appeal was not condoned. The ld. A.R. of the assessee prayed for opportunity to present his case before the ld. CIT(A).

4. The ld. D.R. did not object to the fact that the matter be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A).

5. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions and we find that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without condoning the delay and on ground of limitation. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we are of the considered view that since the rights and liabilities of the assessee were not adjudicated upon, we hold that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored back to his file for fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. At the same time, assessee is cautioned that this being final opportunity, he should immediately produce himself before the ld. CIT(A) on receipt of this order and provide all evidences and documents at the time of hearing so that the case can be decided on merits. With these observations, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to his file. Any service of notice is dispensed with.

6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 10/05/2018.

          Sd/-                                        Sd/-
      [T.S. KAPOOR]                        [PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY]
   ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                             JUDICIAL MEMBER


DATED:10th May, 2018
JJ:1005


Copy forwarded to:
       1.   Appellant
       2.   Respondent
       3.   CIT(A)
       4.   CIT
       5.   DR