IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI “F” BENCH: NEW DELHI

(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)

BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER &
SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.4721/Del/2018

Assessment Year : 2015-16

Pelicon Finance & Leasing Ltd., vs ACIT,

564, I.P.No.2/59, AF/F, Bhim Gali Central Circle-32,

Vishwas Nagar, Shahdara, New Delhi.

Delhi-110032.

PAN-AADPC2968C

APPELLANT RESPONDENT

Appellant by None

Respondent by Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT DR

Date of Hearing 02.08.2021

Date of Pronouncement 11.08.2021

ORDER

PER KUL BHARAT, JM :

This appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2015-16 is
directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-30, New Delhi dated 26.04.2018. The
assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

1. “That the facts and circumstances of the case Assessment order of
the Ld.AO and dismiss petition of condonation of delay as non-
maintainable of CIT(A) is bad in law.

2. On the fact and circumstances of the case the LD CIT(A) was not
justified in dismiss petition of condonation of delay filing appeal (12 days)
as non-maintainable without consider the facts evidence submission made
by appellant in correct prospective.
ITA No.4721/Del/2018

3. On the fact and circumstances of the case the LD CIT(A) was dismiss
appeal as non-maintainable against the principal of natural justice with
appellant and not grant proper opportunity to appellant submit
submission to justified and consider the appeal Ground No.3 & 4.
4. On the fact and circumstances of the case the LD CIT(A) erred to
dismiss petition of condonation of delay as non-maintainable not grant
proper opportunity to appellant submit submission to justified and consider
the appeal on investment in share transfer from opening stock to
investment in shares Rs.11,03,79,050/- made addition u/s 68 of
Rs.11,03,79,050/- by Ld.AO.
5. On the fact and circumstances of the case the LD.CIT(A) erred to
dismiss petition of condonation of delay as non-maintainable not grant
proper opportunity to appellant submit submission to justified and consider
the appeal on disallowance and other expenses Rs.23,176/- by Ld.AO.”

2. At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. From
the records, it is seen that the appeal filed before Ld. CIT(A), was dismissed
being barred by time. It is seen that the appeal filed by the assessee was
barred by 12 days. The delay in filing of appeal was not condoned and the
appeal of the assessee was dismissed.

3. Ld.CIT DR supported the orders of the Ld.CIT(A) and submitted that the
conduct of the assessee was thoroughly negligent.

4. We have heard Ld.CIT DR and perused the impugned order. We find that
before Ld.CIT(A) the assessee had filed an application for condonation of delay
of 12 days. The reasons stated in the application were that the delay was on

Page | 2
ITA No.4721/Del/2018

account of office of Ld. Counsel of the assessee. The assessee had handed
over the assessment order received on 13.12.2017 to his counsel but due to
oversight at the office, appeal could not be filed. We find that this appeal was
dismissed by Ld.CIT(A) by observing as under:-

5. “I find that the appellant has filed the petition for condonation of
delay only upon being required. The petition of the appellant is filed in a
very casual manner without any affidavit. Infact, each day of delay has to
be explained truthfully and should be supported by
affidavit(s)/evidence(s). The appellant has failed to do so. The casual
manner in which the appeal was filed belatedly, is clear from the fact that
the petition for condonation of delay was filed only upon being required,
and that too in a perfunctory manner. Thus, the appellant has not been
able to establish before me if he had sufficient cause for not presenting the
appeal in time. As such, the appellant's appeal is hereby dismissed as
non-maintainable.”

5. The reasoning for dismissal of appeal as recorded by the Ld. CIT(A) is not
justified. Ld.CIT(A) ought to have been given opportunity to the assessee if
there was any defect into the application. Therefore, considering that there
was a small delay of 12 days and the assessee has demonstrated a reasonable
cause for delay in filing of the appeal before Ld.CIT(A). We, therefore, condone
the delay in the interest of principles of natural justice and restore the grounds
to the file of Ld.CIT(A) to decide the grounds on merit by way of a speaking
order. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for
statistical purposes.

Page | 3
ITA No.4721/Del/2018

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

Above decision was pronounced on conclusion of Virtual Hearing
on 11th August, 2021.

Sd/- Sd/-

(PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (KUL BHARAT)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

*Amit Kumar*

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

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT, NEW DELHI

Page | 4