M/S D B INFRATECH,MUMBAI vs. JOINT COMM OF INCOME TAX RANGE 32(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6627/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 February 2025AY 2013-14Bench: the Tribunal be condoned and the impugned order passed by the CIT(A) be set aside since the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without examining the merits granting one more opportunity to the Appellant to make out his case before the CIT(A) on merits. Explain the delay in filing the present appeal, the Learned Authorised Representative for the Assessee submitted that the delay was caused on account of inadvertent mistake committed by the employee of the company who was tasked with the job of 1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 508 days, holding that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the appeal to the CIT(A)'s file for deciding the grounds on merits, granting the Assessee one last opportunity.

What were the facts?

The Assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution, despite the original assessment order being passed under Section 143(3). The Assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal with a significant delay of 508 days, attributing it to an inadvertent mistake by an employee.

What were the issues?

Whether to condone the significant delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, and whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal without deciding on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 250(2)(a),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D BENCH, MUMBAI

Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order, dated 30/05/2023, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’], under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961[hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’], whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had Dismissed the appeal of the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 30/03/2016, passed under Section 143(3) of the Act, for the Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. When the appeal was taken for hearing, the Learned Authorised Representative for the

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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →