M/S JITENDRA SIZING FACTORY,KISHANGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1156/JPR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 November 20187 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by not providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity to explain the delay in filing the appeals. The appeals were therefore set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals against late fees imposed under Section 234E were dismissed by the CIT(A) as not maintainable due to limitation. The CIT(A) relied on an email dated 13.03.2014 as the date of service of demand notice, without giving the assessee an effective opportunity to explain the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly afforded an opportunity to the assessee to explain the delay in filing appeals. Whether the date of email is to be considered as the date of service for limitation purposes without proper hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 200A,Section 234E,Section 249(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAOvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1155, 1156 & 1157/JP/2018

For Appellant: Shri O.P. Bhateja (ITP) jktLo dh vksj ls@

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू

1.

The Appellant- M/s. Jitendra Sizing Factory, Madanganj Kishangarh. 2. The Respondent – The DCIT, CPC (TDS), Ghaziabad. 3. The CIT(A). 4. The CIT, 5. The DR, ITAT, Jaipur 6. Guard File (ITA No. 1155, 1156 & 1157/JP/2018) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@ Aेेपेजंदज. त्महपेजतंत

7 ITA Nos. 1155, 1156 & 1157/JP/2018 M/s. Jitendra Sizing Factory, Kishangarh.

More judgments on Section 200A

All 4,379 judgments and leading authorities on Section 200A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →