CHANDRU SHEWAKRAM WATWANI HUF,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 24(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6661/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 March 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 80 days, citing the assessee's age and health. On merits, the Tribunal held that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act for AY 2015-16 was barred by limitation, as it was issued on 31.07.2022, whereas the last date for issuance was 31.03.2022. Consequently, the assessment order was also quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order dated 09.07.2024 with a delay of 80 days. The assessee, being a senior citizen, claimed the delay was due to health issues and not accessing emails regularly. The Revenue argued that there was also a significant delay in prior appellate proceedings and the assessee lacked a plausible reason.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned and whether the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued within the prescribed limitation period for the assessment year.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 148,Section 147,Section 24A,Section 73(1),Section 144B

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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain, Ld. A.R
For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani, Ld. Sr. D.R

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 09.07.2024, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2015-16. 2. At the outset, it is observed that there is a delay of 80 days in filing of instant appeal, on which the Assessee has submitted that he, being karta of the Assessee HUF is a senior citizen o

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 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →