BINOY RAJEN SHAH,MUMBAI vs. CIRCLE 19(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4986/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 September 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the peculiar facts, offered one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the delay with a sworn affidavit and relevant medical documents. The case was remanded to the Ld. Commissioner for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed in limine by the Ld. Commissioner for being delayed by 222 days. The delay was attributed to the unexpected illness of the chartered accountant's family members, but no documentary evidence or affidavit was filed to support this claim.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned without proper documentary evidence and affidavit from the chartered accountant.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 10(38),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

For Appellant: Shri. Hifzurrahman
For Respondent: Shri. Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. AR
Hearing: 25.09.2025Pronounced: 30.09.2025

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 12.06.2025, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2016-17.

Shri Binoy Rajen Shah 2. In the instant case, the Ld. Commissioner by way of impugned order dismissed the appeal of the Assessee in limine for want of limitation by not condoning the delay of 222 days, filed against the assessment order dated 30.05.2023 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act making the addition of Rs.48,75,750/- on account of variation qua claim of bogus long term capital gain as exempt income u/s 10(38) of the Act on sale of equity shares of M/s. Toyam Industries Ltd. and added the same in the income of the Assessee u/s 68 of the Act, mainly on the reason that the Assessee neither given any documentary evidence in support of the reason for condonation of delay nor filed an affidavit from the chartered accountant to substantiate the reason given.

3.

We have given thoughtful considerations to the peculiar facts and circumstances. We observe from form No.35 that the Assessee in form No.35, column No.15, though has mentioned the reason for delay “there was a delay in filing appeal due to unexpected illness of family members of our chartered accountant”, however, neither filed any particular application nor medical document and/or affidavit of the Ld. CA. Thus, for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, this Court is inclined to offer one more opportunity to the Assessee to substantiate his claim before the Ld. Commissioner by filing appropriate application along with duly sworn affidavit and relevant medical documents. Thus, the case is remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, suffice to say by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. The Assessee is also directed to file appropriate application along with duly sworn affidavit and relevant medical documents in order to substantiate his claim. We also clarify that in case of subsequent default, the Assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →