T C L INDIA HOLDING PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER, NFAC

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2283/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 August 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding sufficient cause. It held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without deciding on merits, which is contrary to Section 250(6) of the Act. The appellate order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) ex-parte due to non-compliance. The assessee sought condonation for a delay in filing the appeal, citing business closure and health issues. The tribunal considered a Supreme Court judgment on condoning delays.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without deciding on merits, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144C(3),Section 250(6),Section 250(4),Section 251(1)(a),Section 251(1)(b),Section 251(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

For Appellant: Shri Stefan Richard Moraes, AR
For Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (Sr. DR)
Hearing: 17.07.2025Pronounced: 04.08.2025

आदेश की प्रतितलति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 144C(3)

All 595 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →