SHIVA ADS(INDIA) PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 11(2)(1), MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the notices from the CIT(A) were sent to employees who had left the job, preventing attendance. The Tribunal condoned the delay, granted a second opportunity, and remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.
What were the facts?
The appeal by the assessee was preferred against the order dated 26/05/2023 by NFAC, Delhi, pertaining to AY 2013-14. The appeal was barred by limitation, with the assessee claiming to be prevented by reasonable cause for not filing on time.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned due to reasonable cause? Whether the assessee deserves a second opportunity for a fresh hearing by the CIT(A)?
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON’BLE
आदेश/O R D E R
PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dt. 26/05/2023 by NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter “the ld. CIT(A)”] pertaining to AY 2013-14.
The appeal is barred by limitation. The learned D/R strongly objected for the condonation of delay and the ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently stated that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause for not filing the appeal on time. In his petition, supported by an affidavit the assessee has mentioned facts which caused the delay in filing the appeal. We have carefully considered the contents of the affidavit. We find that the assessee was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause for not filing the appeal on time.
2 3. On perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A), we find that though the notices were issued by the ld. CIT(A) but the same were sent to the email address of the employees who have left the job. Therefore, the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) could not be attended. Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assured that if given a second opportunity, the assessee will furnish all the necessary details/evidence in support of its contentions. We are of the considered view that the assessee deserves a second opportunity. Therefore, we remit the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A). The assessee is directed to attend the appellate proceedings and furnish all the necessary evidence and the ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the issues afresh after affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Subash Petroleum vs. The Deputy Commissioner (GST)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
