VIDYA SAGAR DWIVEDI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD - 2(5), GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 487/DEL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 July 2021AY 2011-123 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the appeal for fresh consideration. The assessee was directed to file an application for condonation of delay, which the CIT(A) was to consider.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for delay and non-compliance with Section 249(4) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee contended that the appeal was filed after receiving certified copies and that disputed tax was fully deposited.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without adequate opportunity and proper consideration of the assessee's submissions regarding delay and tax deposit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 249(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “SMC-1” BENCH: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI O.P.KANT

Hearing: 28.06.2021Pronounced: 02.07.2021

ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : This appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2011-12 is directed against the order of learned CIT(A), Ghaziabad dated 29.11.2019.

The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

1. “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(Appeals) erred in: i. Dismissing the appeal being non-maintainable without providing due and adequate opportunity of hearing. ii. Confirming the addition of Rs.12,98,030/- made by the Assessing Officer. iii. Appeal was filed after getting the certified copies of assessment order and notice of demand as originally the same were not received by the assessee. iv. There was no admitted tax and even disputed tax was deposited in full. Dismissal of appeal as defective under section 249(4) is against the facts of the case.”

2.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee.

However, it is seen that the appeal of the assessee was rejected on the ground of delay by Ld.CIT(A). It is also noticed that Ld.CIT(A) has recorded that no application seeking condonation of delay was filed by the assessee.

Further, it is also noticed that Ld.CIT(A) has recorded that the assessee had not made payment of taxes as per the provision of Section 249(4) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). However, the assessee has taken a categoric ground No.(iv) stating that there was no admitted tax and even disputed tax was deposited in full.

3.

Ld. Sr. DR submits that he has no objection if the appeal is restored to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for considering the appeal afresh and giving opportunity for filing application for condonation of delay.

4.

Considering these facts, we set aside the order of Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for decision afresh and the assessee would file application seeking condondaiton of delay. The Ld. CIT(A) may condone the delay after considering the submissions made in application. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Above decision was pronounced on conclusion of Virtual Hearing in the presence of both the parties on 02nd July, 2021.

More judgments on Section 249(4)

All 251 judgments and leading authorities on Section 249(4) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →