M/S KARNATAKA BADMINTON ASSOCIATION,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) WARD-1, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 256/BANG/2023Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 June 2023AY 2013-143 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adjudicating on merits. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal granted one more opportunity to the assessee to furnish written submissions.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a delay in filing and non-compliance with notices. The assessee contended that the delay was not 60 days and that they had filed an adjournment application.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal in limine without considering the merits, and if a further opportunity should be granted to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K

For Appellant: Shri. Joseph Varghese, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri. D. K. Mishra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Hearing: 08.06.2023Pronounced: 08.06.2023

Per George George K, Judicial Member:

1.

This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against order of CIT(A), dated 16.02.2023, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2013-14.

2.

At the very outset, we notice the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine by the CIT(A) without adjudicating the issues on merit. Two reasons are given by the CIT(A) for dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limine. First, there is delay of 60 days in filing of appeal and there is no reasonable cause provided for the delay in filing the appeal. Secondly, the CIT(A) notes assessee has not complied with various notices issued from his office for filing the written submissions.

3.

The learned AR submitted that the CIT(A) is not justified in holding there is a delay in filing the appeal by 60 days when the appeal was filed on 15.04.2016 manually and e-filed on 15.06.2016 as per the Board’s Circular No.20/2016 dated 26.05.2016. The learned AR submitted that in response to the notice issued through e-portal, assessee had filed adjournment application. Copy of the same is placed on record.

4.

The learned DR supported the order of the CIT(A).

5.

We have heard the rival submission and perused the material on record. In the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be granted to the assessee to furnish its written submissions. The assessee shall cooperate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments in filing its written submissions. It is ordered accordingly.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →