EIH LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 8(1),, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 143/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 June 2026AY 2008-20094 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the assessee to file an application for condonation of delay or to explain why there was no delay. The CIT(A) was instructed to consider this application liberally and decide the appeal on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against an assessment order. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to delay in filing. The assessee contended there was no delay as the assessment order was received belatedly.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal before the CIT(A) was filed with delay, and if so, whether the delay should be condoned to decide the appeal on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH,

For Appellant: Shri Kinjal Buaria, ACA
For Respondent: Shri Santanu Ghosh, Sr. DR
Hearing: 15.06.2026Pronounced: 17.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.143/KOL/2026 Assessment Year: 2008-09

EIH Limited Vs. DCIT, Circle-8(1), N-806A, 8th Floor, Diamond Kolkata Heritage Building, 16, Stand Road, Fairley Place, Kolkata-700 017 [PAN: AAACE6898B] APPELLANT RESPONDENT

Appellant by : Shri Kinjal Buaria, ACA Respondent by : Shri Santanu Ghosh, Sr. DR

Date of hearing : 15.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 17.06.2026 O R D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER This Appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the NFAC, Delhi [“the Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 11.12.2025passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the assessment year 2008-09.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that an Assessment Order came to be passed u/s 147/263/251/143(3) of the Act on 29.02.2016, by making certain additions.

ITA No.143/KOL/2026 EIH Limited; A.Y: 2008-09 3. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 29.02.2016, Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A), vide order dated 11.12.2025, dismissed the Appeal on the ground of delay in latches.

4.

The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that there is no delay in filing the first Appeal as the Assessment Order itself has been received by the Assessee belatedly and as per the Assessee's calculation, there is no delay in filing the first Appeal. However, the the Ld. CIT(A) committed error in dismissing the appeal on delay in latches. Thus, sought for allowing the present Appeal.

5.

Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted that there was a delay of 70 days in filing the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), however, the Assessee has not filed any application for condonation of delay before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Appeal was rightly dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A), which requires no interference at the hands of the Tribunal.

6.

We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. In the present case, the Assessment Order was passed on 29.02.2016 and the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) challenging the Assessment Order. As per the Assessee, there is no delay in filing the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) as the Assessment Order has been served on the Assessee belatedly. Considering the fact

ITA No.143/KOL/2026 EIH Limited; A.Y: 2008-09 that there is a prima facie delay in filing the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), it is for the Assessee to explain the ‘delay in filing’ the Appeal or ‘no delay in filing’ the Appeal by way of an application narrating the factual aspects.

7.

In view of the above, we direct the Assessee to file an appropriate application for condonation of delay explaining the cause for the delay, if any or explain how there is no delay in filing the appeal. If such application is filed, the Ld. CIT(A) is directed to consider the same liberally and decide the Appeal on merits.

8.

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

Order pronounced on 17.06.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 17.06.2026 DP, PS

ITA No.143/KOL/2026 EIH Limited; A.Y: 2008-09 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 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →