SUNIL GABRIEL FONSECA,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2115/HYD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 June 2021AY 2013-142 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the delay was not intentional and was due to circumstances beyond the assessee's control, particularly the new e-filing procedure. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with the CIT(A) but it was dismissed due to a 46-day delay. The delay was attributed to a procedural lapse in e-filing, not an intentional or deliberate act.

What were the issues?

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

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD ‘B’ BENCH : Hyderabad

Before: Shri S.S. GODARA & Shri L.P. SAHU

Hearing: 13/05/2021

Date of Hearing : 13/05/2021 Date of Pronouncement : 25 /06/2021 O R D E R PER S.S. GODARA, J.M. This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2013-14 arises against the CIT(A)-6 Hyderabad’s order dated 29.08.2018 passed in case no.10408/2016-17 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short ‘the Act’].

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

We notice at the outset that the CIT(A) has declined assessee’s first appeal for the sole reason that he had not filed any condonation petiion explaining 46 days delay The assessee’s case on the other hand is that although he had Sri Sunil Gabriel Fonseca, Hyd. filed his lower appeal in regular mode well within time, the impugned delay only arose on account of procedural lapse in e-filing only. Ld.DR fails to dispute all these clinching aspects. All this factual backdrop sufficiently indicate that the impugned delay of 46 days in assessee’s lower appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate but on account of circumstances beyond his control. And more so, because of the newly introduced e-filing procedure. We therefore deem it appropriate to restore assessee’s instant grievance back to the CIT(A) for his fresh adjudication on merits within three effective opportunities of hearing.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in Open Court on 25/06/2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →