KALPNA MUKESH DOSHI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-50(3), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 9826/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 September 2021AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that even with a minor delay or confusion regarding service of the assessment order, the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits. The appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after condoning any delay and providing an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were dismissed by the CIT(A) for delay without condonation. The assessee contended that the appeals were filed within the period of limitation, while the CIT(A) believed there was a delay and no condonation was sought.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeals for delay without condoning it and without deciding the appeal on merits.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: CA Ms. Srishti Gupta, CA
For Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Hearing: 07/09/2021Pronounced: 07/09/2021
2.

Since common grievance is involved in all these appeals, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

3.

The common grievance which needs to be adjudicated relates to the dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) without condoning the delay.

4.

We have carefully perused the order of the CIT(A) we find that according to the CIT(A) there was a delay in filing the appeals whereas according to the assessee the appeals were filed within the period of limitation.

5.

However, the CIT(A) was of the firm belief that there was a delay in filing the appeals and the assessee has not sought condonation for delay in filing of appeal hence, the appeal was dismissed.

6.

We are of the considered view that even if there was some confusion in respect of the service of the assessment order between the CIT(A) and the assessee, the CIT(A) ought to have decided the appeal on merits of the case as the alleged delay is very miniscule.

7.

In the interest of justice and fair play we restore the captioned appeals to the files of the CIT(A). The assessee is directed to file affidavit requesting the condonation of delay, if any, and the CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh after giving a reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

8.

In the result, the above captioned appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

9.

Decision announced in the open court in the presence of both the representatives on 07.09.2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →