What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding sufficient reason for it. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for deciding the appeal on merits.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed on technical grounds for delay. The assessee claimed the delay was due to efforts to revive his business.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiable and whether the appeal should be decided on merits.

Pasham Laxmi Srinivas Reddy… vs ACIT | ITAT Hyderabad 2021

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

For Respondent: Shri D.J. Prabhakar Anand

Hearing: 15/09/2021

O R D E R PER L.P. SAHU, A.M.: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against CIT(A) – 6, Hyderabad’s order dated 19/06/2019 for AY 2015-16 involving proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ; in short “the Act”.

In the course of hearing, it was observed that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal only on technical grounds for not accepting the reasons for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before him, where as we observe from the order of the CIT(A) that there was a sufficient reason for delay as the assessee waws busy in reviving his business, therefore we condone the delay. We deem it fit and proper in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored to the file of :- 2 -: Pasham Laxmi Srinivas Reddy, Sec.bad.

CIT(A) for deciding various grounds of appeal on merits. The learned DR agreed.

We have considered the facts of the case. We are of the view that interest of justice will be served if the matter is restored to the file of first appellate authority for deciding various grounds of appeal

of the assessee on merits. Accordingly, the CIT(A) is directed to afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter decide the appeal on merits. We direct the assessee to appear before CIT(A) with all the relevant evidences; at his own risk and responsibility to be followed by three effective opportunities of hearing.

4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on 17th September, 2021.

Sd/- Sd/- (S.S. GODARA) (L. P. SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 17th September, 2021. *gmv Copy to : 1 Pasham Laxmi Srinivas Reddy, H.No. 1-1-163/1,65, Alexander road, Secunderabad – 500 026 2 ACIT, Circle 10(1), Hyderabad. 3 CIT(A) – 6, Hyderabad. Pr. CIT – 6, Hyderabad 4 DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5 6 Guard File.

:- 3 -: Pasham Laxmi Srinivas Reddy, Sec.bad.

S.No. Details Date 1 Draft dictated on 2 Draft placed before author Draft proposed & placed before the 3 Second Member Draft discussed/approved by Second 4 Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement 7 File sent to Bench Clerk Date on which the file goes to Head 8 Clerk 9 Date on which file goes to A.R. 10 Date of Dispatch of order

PASHAM LAXMI SRINIVAS REDDY,SECUNDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(1), HYDERABAD

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments