PRACHEEN KARIGAR ASSOCIATION,BAHADURGARH vs. ITO WARD - 3, ROHTAK, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2968/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 July 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the CIT(A) decided the appeal on an issue that was not raised by the assessee in their grounds of appeal. Therefore, the appeal is restored back to the CIT(A) to adjudicate the grounds raised by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was regarding an addition of Rs.6,88,660/- made while processing the return of income u/s. 143(1). However, the CIT(A) decided the appeal on the issue of delay in filing Form 10B, which was not raised by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can decide an appeal on an issue not raised by the assessee in their grounds of appeal, and if the CIT(A) has the power to condone delay in filing Form 10B.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI

Hearing: 31/07/2025

(A.Y.2015-16) Pracheen Karigar Association, H. No. 4/294, Street No. 4, Nai Basti, Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar, Haryana 124507 ...... अपीलाथ�/Appellant PAN: AAAAH-2502-F बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3 ..... �ितवादी/Respondent Rohtak, Haryana 124001 अपीलाथ� �ारा/ Appellant by : Shri Navin Gupta, Advocate. �ितवादी�ारा/Respondent by : Ms. Sudha Gupta, SR.DR सुनवाई क� ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा क� ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 31/07/2025 आदेश/ORDER

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against an ex-parte order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 05.03.2025, for Assessment Year 2015-16.

2.

Shri Navin Gupta, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the assessee has been appearing before the CIT(A) from the very first date of hearing, the CIT(A) after condoning delay in filing the appeal decided the appeal on an issue which was never assailed by the assessee in grounds of appeal

raised in Form No.

35. The ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed that specific grounds were raised before the CIT(A) in Form No. 35, assailing addition of Rs.6,88,660/- made while processing return of income u/s. 143(1) of the Act. He further pointed that (AY 2015-16) no ground of appeal relating to denial of benefit u/s. 12A of the Act for delay in filing of Form 10B was raised before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee holding that the CIT(A) is not empowered to condone delay in filing of Form 10B.

3. Per contra, Ms. Sudha Gupta representing the department vehemently defended the impugned order. She submitted that the assessee’s appeal has been rightly rejected by the CIT(A) on account of delay in submission of Form No. 10B. The prescribed authorities under the Act has power to condone delay in filing of Form 10B and not the CIT(A).

4. Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. The issue raised by the assessee in appeal before the CIT(A) was disallowance of revenue expenditure amounting of Rs.6,88,660/-. The CIT(A) has decided appeal of the assessee on the issue of delay in filing of Form 10B, whereas, no such ground was raised by the assessee in Form No. 35 before the CIT(A). This appeal is restored back to the CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the grounds raised by the assessee in Form No. 35 after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, is accordance with law.

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →