BALAJI INVESTMENT,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 27(1)(1), MUMBAI

PDF

ITA 364/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 March 2025AY 2011-12Bench: me and also the orders passed by the revenue authorities.5. From the records, I noticed that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) on the ground that the same was not filed within limitation and while passing the said order Ld. CIT(A) has categorically mention that the assessee has neither accepted nor forwarded the reasons for the delay, even no documentary evidence in support of the delay was filed.5 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The appeal was filed by the assessee challenging an order that dismissed their appeal on the grounds of being filed beyond the prescribed time limit, without sufficient reasons or evidence for the delay. The assessee claimed to have filed written submissions which were not considered by the lower appellate authority.

Held

The Tribunal held that once the assessee files detailed written submissions, the authority is bound to consider them and adjudicate the issues on merit. Since this was not done, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) to pass a fresh speaking order after considering the submissions and providing an opportunity of hearing.

Key Issues

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on limitation without considering the assessee's submissions and the reasons for delay, thereby failing to adjudicate on merits.

Sections Cited

250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI

For Appellant: Mr. Aditya Ramachandran

For Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR

Hearing: 10.03.2025Pronounced: 11.03.2025

Date of Hearing 10.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 11.03.2025 आदेश / ORDER

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:

The present appeal has been filed by the revenue challenging the impugned order 10.12.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi / CIT(A), for the A.Y 2011- 12.

At the very outset, I noticed that the present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A), wherein the appeal of the assessee was dismissed on account of the fact that the same was not filed within the time prescribed under the act.

In this regard, Ld.AR submitted that assessee had filed a detailed written submissions dated 5/7/2024. It was further submitted that these submissions were not at all considered by Ld. CIT(A).

I have heard the counsels for both the parties, perused the material placed on record, judgement cited before me and also the orders passed by the revenue authorities.

From the records, I noticed that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) on the ground that the same was not filed within limitation and while passing the said order Ld. CIT(A) has categorically mention that the assessee has neither accepted nor forwarded the reasons for the delay, even no documentary evidence in support of the delay was filed.