CHELLANAM SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK,ERNAKULAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORP WARD 2(4), ERNAKULAM
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the lower authorities did not properly examine the assessee's accounts and activities before passing the assessment and penalty orders. The dismissal of appeals solely on the ground of delay, without considering the merits, was deemed unsustainable.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a co-operative bank, filed appeals against assessment and penalty orders. The CIT(A) dismissed these appeals due to a significant delay in filing, without condoning the delay or adjudicating on the merits. The assessee argued for condonation based on reasonable cause and the importance of substantial justice over technicalities.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals solely on the ground of delay without condoning it and adjudicating the merits of the case. Whether the assessment and penalty orders were passed without proper examination of the assessee's accounts and activities.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 144,Section 144B,Section 271AAC(1),Section 270A,Section 80P,Section 69A,Section 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY
PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT:
SA 63 to 65/COCH/2026 & ITA 835, 836 & 849/COCH/2026 CHELLANAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK
These three appeals, together with the connected stay 1. petitions, have been filed by Chellanam Service Co-operative Bank, Ernakulam (the assessee/petitioner/appellant), for Assessment Year 2018-19, against the appellate orders of the Commissioner
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 144B
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Mohammed Javed Bhati, Sikar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, SikarITA 994/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Jharkhand Contractors Association Thro Its President- Pramod Kumar vs. Bharat Coking Coal LTD. Thro Its Chairman Cum Managing DirectorJharkhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Isc Processors Private Limited vs. Superintendent,Range-Iv, Burrabazar Div, CGST And Cx, Kolkata (N) Commissionerate And AnrCalcutta · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Raashi Constructions vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Bidasaria Fenster Solutions vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 13 Oct 2026
- Amit Agency vs. Commissioner, CGST And CxPatna · 13 Oct 2026