SHRADDHA GLOBE LLP,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8367/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2026AY 2022-239 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, citing the disruption caused by the search action and emphasizing substantial justice over technicalities. The ex-parte order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the case was remanded for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) due to non-appearance. The assessee claimed the delay and non-appearance were due to a search action on their group, causing disruption and loss of track of proceedings. The assessee became aware of the order only upon receiving a bank attachment notice.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without granting a proper opportunity, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned due to circumstances beyond the assessee's control.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144B,Section 250(6),Section 68,Section 145(3),Section 234B,Section 234D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, G” BENCH, MUMBAI

आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. ��थ� / The Respondent. 2. आयकर आयु�/ The CIT 3. �धान आयकर आयु� / Pr.CIT 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, 5. Mumbai गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�ािपत �ित //True Copy//

उप/सहायक पंजीकार /(Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →