MEGHS GOLD PVT. LTD. vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Facts

The appellant, Meghs Gold Pvt. Ltd., filed a Tax Appeal before the High Court of Gujarat against the judgment and order dated January 27, 2006, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No. 1664/Ahd/2001 for Assessment Year 1996-97. The High Court admitted the appeal and framed a substantial question of law concerning the ITAT's decision not to condone a delay of 38 days in filing an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The appeal was filed by the assessee against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax.

Held

The High Court held that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was not right in law in not condoning the delay of 38 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Court reasoned that, in light of the law declared by the Apex Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji And Others (167 ITR 471), a delay of 38 days in preferring an appeal before the CIT(Appeals) is required to be condoned. The Court answered the substantial question of law in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The operative direction was that the CIT(Appeals) shall now hear the appeal on merits. The Tax Appeal was allowed accordingly.

Key Issues

1. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in not condoning the delay of 38 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? (Question of law) Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that a delay of 38 days in preferring an appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned in view of the settled principle of law. The assessee contended that both the authorities below erred in not deciding the appeal on merits. The assessee relied on the Apex Court's decision in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji And Others, reported in 167 ITR 471. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue.