THE WINDSOR FLAT OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1385/HYD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 September 2026AY 2023-2412 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee, The Windsor Flat Owners Welfare Association, filed an appeal before the learned Addl/JCIT(A)-4, Delhi for Assessment Year 2023-2024. The appeal was filed on 14.08.2024 against an order dated 18.12.2023, which was received by the assessee on 18.12.2023, resulting in a delay of approximately 8 months. The assessee claimed to have filed an application for condonation of delay along with Form-35. However, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine, stating that no such application was found attached to Form-35. The assessee contended that the application was indeed filed and attached, and a copy was also placed in the paper book. The assessee also argued that the Central Processing Centre (CPC) incorrectly levied tax at the maximum marginal rate instead of the normal rate applicable to societies registered under the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001, citing Section 167B of the Act.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had duly attached an application for condonation of delay, which was not considered by the learned CIT(A) due to its alleged non-availability on the portal. The Tribunal noted that the learned CIT(A) ought to have issued a notice to the assessee for clarification before dismissing the appeal in limine. Considering the assessee's grievance regarding the tax rate applied by the CPC and the fact that the assessee would be remediless if the delay was not condoned, the Tribunal decided to condone the delay, subject to a cost of Rs. 5,000/- payable to the Prime Minister's National Relief Fund. Since the learned CIT(A) had not adjudicated the appeal on merits, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merits after providing a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and considering the relied-upon decisions. The Tribunal explicitly stated that the dismissal of the appeal in limine resulted in a wrong collection of tax.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay without affording an opportunity to explain the delay and submit a petition for condonation, when such an application was allegedly filed with Form-35? 2. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in disposing of the appeal solely on the ground of delay without adjudicating the issue on merits, especially when submissions on merits were made? 3. Whether the provisions of Section 167B are applicable to the assessee, a society registered under the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001, and whether the CPC erred in levying tax at the maximum marginal rate? Assessee's Contentions: - The learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine despite a duly filed application for condonation of delay along with Form-35, as evidenced by the acknowledgment and the paper book. - The learned CIT(A) failed to issue a notice for clarification regarding the missing attachment and dismissed the appeal without affording an opportunity to be heard on merits. - Section 167B is not applicable to the assessee, a registered society, and tax should be computed at normal slab rates, not the maximum marginal rate. Reliance was placed on decisions in Sri Markendeya Educational Society vs. ITO (ITA.No.593/Viz./2025) and KMR Educational Society vs. ACIT (2015] 55 taxmann.com 218 (Hyderabad-Trib.). Revenue's Contentions: - The learned DR objected to the condonation of delay, reiterating the learned CIT(A)'s finding that no letter or application for condonation of delay was attached to Form-35.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 167B,Section 249(2),Section 249(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO

Pronounced: 30.09.2026

This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 11.02.2026 of the learned Addl/JCIT(A)-4, Delhi for the Assessment Year 2023-2024. 2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“The order of the Ld Addl JCIT A 4 Delhi is erroneous in law 1) and on the facts of the case 2) The Ld AddI JCIT A erred in dismissing the app

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 167B

All 173 judgments and leading authorities on Section 167B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →