RIDHI SIDHI COMMODITIES PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1577/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 July 2026AY 2009-20104 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 3 years in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) to decide the appeal afresh on its merits after hearing the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 3 years. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the grounds of delay and laches. The assessee contended that the delay was due to a mistake in mentioning the date of the original assessment order instead of the rectification order.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiable and should be condoned. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay without considering the merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH,

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar and Shri Aryan
For Respondent: Shri Sandip Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 22.07.2026Pronounced: 24.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1577/KOL/2026 Assessment Year: 2009-10

Ridhi Sidhi Commodities Vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata Private Limited 2nd Floor, Room No.216, 23B, N.S Road, Kolkata, West Bengal-700 0001 [PAN: AADCR2882B] APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Anil Kochar and Shri Aryan Kochar, ARs Respondent by : Shri Sandip Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 22.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 24.07.2026 O R D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER: This Appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short) dated 27.02.2026, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the Assessment Year 2009-10.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that, an Assessment Order came to be passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act on 27.12.2016 by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 27.12.2016, Assessee filed an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld.

ITA No.1577/Kol/2026 Ridhi Sidhi Commodities Private Limited; A.Y: 2009-10 CIT(A) vide Order dated 27.02.2026, dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee on delay in latches. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 27.02.2026, Assessee filed the present Appeal.

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that, though there was sufficient cause to condone the delay, the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay, thus sought for allowing the Appeal.

4.

The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that there was no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay of 3 years in filing the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the first appeal of the Assessee in delay in laches, thus, sought for dismissal of the present Appeal.

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 27.12.2016, the Assessee preferred Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 3 years. As per the Assessee, the cause of the delay was that “The assessee filled one rectification petition u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the same assessment order on 13.01.2017. The order against the said rectification petition filled u/s 154 was passed on 10.03.2017 and served to the u/s on 21.03.2017. After receiving the order u/s 154/ 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. We have filled

ITA No.1577/Kol/2026 Ridhi Sidhi Commodities Private Limited; A.Y: 2009-10 an appeal on 08.04.2017. But at the time of filling of appeal by mistake only date of rectification order was written, i.e. 10.03.2017 instead of date of original assessment order passed u/s 147/143(3) i.e. 27.12.2016. Therefore, as per advice we are again filling the same appeal by rectifying the date of order. Due to this mistake on our side there is considerable delay as per the time limit prescribed. But your good self my condone this delay. Therefore, we request your good self to accept this appeal by condoning the delay. We will be grateful for approval for the con donation application. Hope our request will be kept.".

However, the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay and dismissed the Appeal.

6.

It is expected from the Assessee to file the Appeal on time, if the cause for delay is bona- fide and beyond the control of the Assessee, the same can be construed as sufficient cause. The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the Appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay. In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that the delay when supported by justifiable reasons, must make way for the cause of substantial

ITA No.1577/Kol/2026 Ridhi Sidhi Commodities Private Limited; A.Y: 2009-10 justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 3 years in filing the first Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.

7.

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 24.07.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 24.07.2026 DP, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //TRUE COPY//

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →