SUPERTECH REALTORS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, SPECIAL RANGE, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1136/DEL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 November 2022AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the interest of justice would be served by giving the assessee an opportunity to explain the delay with evidence. The CIT(A) was directed to consider the reasons for delay and take a decision based on principles of justice, equity, and good conscience.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 125 days. The CIT(A) refused to condone the delay, citing negligence on the part of the assessee. The assessee argued for a liberal approach to condonation of delay, citing Supreme Court judgments.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned, and whether the addition made by the AO was legally sustainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 194A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. C. N. PrasadDr. B. R. R. Kumar

Hearing: 12.09.2022Pronounced: 25.11.2022

Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-3, Kanpur dated 09.09.2020.

2.

Following grounds have been raised by the assessee:

“1. That the order dated 09.09.2020 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-3, Kanpur, is bad in law and on facts. He has not dealt with the grounds of appeal on merits.

2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have condoned the delay of 125 days in filing the appeal and admitted the same for disposal on merit.

3. That the order of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) refusing to condone the delay is against the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in several judgments notably in Collector land Acquisition v. Mst Katizi

2 Supertcch Realtors Pvt. Ltd. (1997) 167 ITR 471 (SC) wherein it was held that in the matter of condonation of delay, liberal approach should be adopted as ordinarily the litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late and when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have a vested right in injustice being done because of a non- deliberate delay.

4.

That on merits, the appellant has strong case as the addition and consequential reduction of interest of Rs. 107.56 crores paid to NOIDA Authority from the inventories/work-in-progress is legally unsustainable as provisions of section 40(a)(ia), read with section 194A of the Act are not applicable in view of the decision of jurisdictional Allahabad High Court, affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority v. CIT (Appeals) & Others (2018) 406 UR 209 (SC).”

3.

The assessee has filed return of income on 29.09.2015 declaring total income of Rs. Nil. The assessee company is engaged in the field of development and construction of residential and commercial project. During the year under consideration, the assessee company has undertaken to construct its first and sole mixed use project naming “Supernova”.

4. The appeal before the ld. CIT(A) has been filed with a delay of 125 days. The ld. CIT(A) refuse to condone delay holding that negligent attitude of responsible person due to oversight differently comes under the purview of triangle of negligence, in action and want of bonafides. The assessee explains that the delay was for bonafide reasons and the statement of Sh. Alok Kumar who is responsible of filing of the appeal has also been submitted.

3 Supertcch Realtors Pvt. Ltd. 5. We find that the interest of justice would be well served, if an opportunity is given to the assessee to explain the reasons for delay in filing of the appeal with all the evidences before the ld. CIT(A) who shall consider and take decision as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act and keeping in view the principles of “justice, equity and good conscience”.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 25/11/2022.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →