THE JULANA PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK,HARYANA vs. JCIT, TDS RANGE, KARNAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 579/DEL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 February 2023AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order and that the assessee contended the appeals were filed within time before the CIT(A). In the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the appeals to the file of the CIT(A) for disposal on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals before the ITAT with a delay of 180 days, which was condoned by the Tribunal. The assessee's appeals before the CIT(A) were dismissed ex-parte on the grounds of limitation, with the CIT(A) stating a delay of 2795 days.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals filed before the CIT(A) were time-barred and whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) violated principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 272A(2)(k)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “H” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA

Hearing: 09.02.2023

आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M.

These three appeals are filed by the Assessee against common order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Hisar dated 24.09.2020 for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 respectively. Assessee raised the following common grounds in all these appeals: -

1.

“That the impugned order is bad both on facts and law.

2.

That the learned appellate authority has wrongly & illegally held that the appeals are time barred by 2795 days ignoring the I.T.A.Nos.577, 578 & 579/Del/2021 date of service (19.11.2019) and date of filing the appeal (07.12.2019) in form 35.

3.

That the learned appellate authority wrongly and illegally attributed the delay in service of order as delay in filing appeal, (date of order 09.03.2012 & date of service 19.11.2019).

4. That the learned appellate authority wrongly and illegally passed ex-parte order ignoring the principle of natural justice assuming / presuming that notices issued are served on the appellant.

5.

That the learned appellate authority wrongly and illegally confirmed the penalty u/s 272A(2)(k) ignoring the fact that the issue is covered in favour of appellant.

6.

That the appellant craves permission to add, amend, elucidate any ground of appeal

at the time of hearing.”

2. In spite of issue of notice none appeared on behalf of assessee, nor any adjournment was sought. These appeals are disposed off on hearing the Ld. DR. On perusal of the record before us, it is noticed that these appeals were filed with delay of 180 days. As these appeals were filed during the period of pandemic and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in suomoto writ petition (civil no. 3/2020) dated 08.03.2021 extended the limitation period for filing appeals the delay in filing appeals by the assessee before the Tribunal is condoned.

3. These appeals of the assessee were dismissed ex parte order by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) on limitation. The ld. CIT(A) observed in his order that the appeals were time barred by 2795 days and, therefore, they are time barred. We also observed that the order was passed by the ld. Commissioner ex parte giving the assessee only two opportunities to represent its case. It is also the contention of the assessee in the I.T.A.Nos.577, 578 & 579/Del/2021 grounds of appeal that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) wrongly dismissed the appeals of the assessee as time barred ignoring the date of service of assessment order was 19.11.2019 and the date of filing the appeals before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) was 07.12.2019 as specified in Form 35.

Therefore according to the assessee the appeals were filed in time and there is no delay in filing the appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). In the circumstances, in the interest of justice, we restore this appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) to dispose off the appeals on merits after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

4.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 09/02/2023

More judgments on Section 272A(2)(k)

All 249 judgments and leading authorities on Section 272A(2)(k) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →