LORD GUHAN JI BENEFICIARY OF TRILOCHANA JI TRUST,GORAKHPUR vs. DC/ACIT-1, GORAKHPUR, GORAKHPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 33/VNS/2025Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi27 August 2026AY 2023-245 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the file to the First Appellate Authority with a direction to give the assessee an opportunity to explain the delay. If the delay is condoned, the appeal is to be decided on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a return of income, and the CPC raised a demand. The assessee's appeal before the First Appellate Authority was dismissed in limine due to a significant delay. The assessee then approached the ITAT.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the dismissal of the appeal due to delay. The secondary issue concerned the correctness of the tax levy at the maximum rate under Section 143(1).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CIRCUIT BENCH (SMC

Before: SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CIRCUIT BENCH (SMC), VARANASI BEFORE SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.33/VNS/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-24 Lord Guhan Ji Beneficiary v. The DDIT of Trilochana Ji Trust CPC Durga Bari Road Bengaluru Alinagar, Gorakhpur (U.P) TAN/PAN:AAAJL2077J (Applicant) (Respondent) Applicant by: None Respondent by: Shri Deepak Yadav, D.R. O R D E R This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 30.12.2024, passed by the Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Pune for Assessment Year 2023-24.

2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 27.06.2023 declaring a total income of Rs.1,77,000/-. The Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) processed the return of the assessee and vide intimation under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act’), dated 18.12.2023 and raised a Demand of Rs.62,980/-. Subsequently, the assessee moved a Rectification Application under section 154 of the Act. The CPC, vide Rectification Order passed under section 154 of

ITA No.33/VNS/2025 Page 2 of 5

the Act, dated 13.06.2024, disposed of the Rectification Application moved by the assessee. 3.0 Aggrieved with the order of the CPC dated 18.12.2023, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority. Subsequently, the appeal was assigned to the NFAC, which dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine for the reason of delay of 333 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority and confirmed the order of the CPC. 4.0 Now the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Pune, by raising the following grounds of appeal:

1.

BECAUSE the "CIT(A)" has erred in law and on facts in deciding the appeal as dismissed on the ground that

"2.16 Since condonation of delay is not granted, there is no need to adjudicate on merits of the case. In this regard, reliance is placed on the decision in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. vs. M/s Satish Chand Shivhare and Brothers SLP (CIVIL) No. 5301 of 2022 dated 04th April, 2022 wherein the Hon'ble Court has held as under:

"If delay is not condoned, no adjudication on merits is warranted"

3.

On the basis of the circumstances exist in the case, it is held that the Appellant was not having any "sufficient cause" for delay in filing appeal. The appeal filed by the

ITA No.33/VNS/2025 Page 3 of 5

Appellant is held to be invalid and non-maintainable being out of time. For statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as DISMISSED in-limine."

2.

BECAUSE levy of tax on maximum rate at the time of processing of return under section 143(1) of the Act is outside the scope of adjustment allowed to be made by the assessing officer in terms of provisions of section 143(1)(a) of the Act, therefore the authorities below have grossly erred in law and on facts by charging the income disclosed by the appellant to taxes at the maximum rate of taxation.

3.

BECAUSE appellant being an artificial juridical person as defined in clause (vii) of sub-section (31) to section 2 of the Act is chargeable to tax on such rates as are defined in terms of the provisions contained in 'Paragraph A of Part I to The First Schedule to Section 2 of Finance Act, 2022 hence the authorities below have erred in law and on facts in taking a view to the contrary and creating erroneous demand of Rs.62,980/- by levying taxes at maximum rate of taxation.

4.

BECAUSE looking to the assessment history of the appellant levy of taxes at maximum marginal rate is wholly against the principle of law relating to rule of consistency as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT reported in 193 ITR 321 and therefore demand of Rs.62,980/- deserves to be deleted.

5.

BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and principles of natural justice.

ITA No.33/VNS/2025 Page 4 of 5

5.0 None was present on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was called out for hearing nor was any adjournment application moved in this regard. However, looking into the facts of the case, I proceed to adjudicate the appeal ex-parte qua the assessee.

6.0 The Ld. Sr. D.R. placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.

7.0 I have heard head the Ld. Sr. D.R. and have also perused the material on record. Looking into the facts of this case, I deem it appropriate to restore this file to the Office of the Ld. First Appellate Authority with the direction to give an opportunity to the assessee to explain the delay in filing the appeal and thereafter, if the delay is properly explained, condone the delay and decide the appeal on merit after providing an opportunity to the assessee to present its cases. It is ordered accordingly. I also caution the assessee to fully comply with the directions of the Ld. First Appellate Authority in the set-aside proceedings when called upon to do so, failing which, the Ld. First Appellate Authority would be at complete liberty to pass the order in accordance with law, based on material available on record even if it is ex-parte qua the assessee.

ITA No.33/VNS/2025 Page 5 of 5

8.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 27/08/2026.

Sd/- [SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:27/08/2026 JJ: Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR By order

Assistant Registrar/DDO

More judgments on Section 154

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →