O R D E R

PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)”] dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay of 72 days in filing the appeal before him.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessment was completed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A) with a delay of 72 days. The learned CIT(A), however, declined to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine observing that the assessee had adopted a negligent approach.

3. The learned Authorised Representative submitted that the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate. It was contended that the assessee was under a bona fide belief that Shri Sharana Veereshwar Sahakari Bank Ltd would rectify the incorrect bank data furnished to the department. It was further submitted that the assessee is serving as Principal of a College of Education with limited staff strength and was occupied with completion of semester work and conduct of examinations during the relevant period. Immediately thereafter, the assessee approached the tax consultant at Belagavi and filed the appeal. Hence, it was pleaded that sufficient cause existed for the delay. Accordingly, the ld. AR prayed for the condonation of delay and set aside the matter to the ld. CIT-A for fresh adjudication on merit of the case as per law.

4. The ld. DR on the other hand did not raise any serious objection on restoring the matter to the ld. CIT-A for fresh adjudication as per law.

5. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. We find that the delay involved is only 72 days. The explanation furnished by the assessee, in our considered opinion, constitutes reasonable and sufficient cause within the meaning of law. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji & Others reported in 167 ITR 471 has held that a liberal approach should be adopted while considering applications for condonation of delay so as to advance substantial justice.

5.1 In the present case, the learned CIT(A), instead of deciding the matter on merits, dismissed the appeal merely on technical grounds without properly appreciating the explanation offered by the assessee. In our view, such approach defeats the cause of substantial justice. Accordingly, the delay of 72 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) is condoned.

6. Coming to the merits of the matter, we notice that the learned CIT(A) has not adjudicated any of the grounds on merits since the appeal itself was dismissed as time barred. In the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on the grounds raised by the assessee. The learned CIT(A) shall provide adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee and thereafter pass a speaking order in accordance with law.

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