SUSHIL MANOHAR AGARKAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO 23(1) (3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1741/MUM/2021Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 June 2022AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT found that the CIT(A) had not condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal decided to remand the appeal back to the CIT(A) with a direction to condone the delay and decide the appeal afresh on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was delayed by 24 days. The CIT(A) did not condone this delay. The assessee challenged this inaction and other issues before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal. The ITAT also remanded other grounds for fresh adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘E ‘ BENCH

Before: SHRI M.BALAGANESH & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARYShri Sushil Manohar Agarkar

For Appellant: Shri Prateek Jha & Shri Prayag Jha
For Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi
Hearing: 06/06/2022Pronounced: 08/06/2022

आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M):

1.

This appeal in A.Y.2011-12 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1034652298(1) dated 05/08/2021 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 24/03/2014 by the ld. ITO-23(1)(3), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO).

2.

At the outset, we find that the ld. CIT(A) had not condoned the delay of 24days in filing of appeal by the assessee before him. We find that the assessee had challenged this action vide Ground No.1 before us. We find that assessee had also filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay of 24 days. In these circumstances, we deem it fit and appropriate to remand this appeal to the file of ld CIT(A) with a direction to condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal denovo, in accordance with law. Accordingly, the Ground No.1 raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

3.

The other grounds raised by the assessee are also remanded back to ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of the issues on merits in accordance with law. The assessee is at liberty to furnish fresh evidences, if any, in support of his contentions, before the ld. CIT(A).

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 08/06/2022 by way of proper mentioning in the notice board.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →