SHREE GANPATI TRADERS,KISHANGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1158/JPR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 November 20187 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) failed to provide an effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee regarding the delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed as not maintainable due to limitation. The CIT(A) relied on an email dated 15.12.2013 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) erred in dismissing the appeal without providing an adequate opportunity to explain the delay in filing, and whether the limitation period was correctly calculated based on the email service.

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. 1158/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. Shree Ganpati Traders, 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. 1158/JP/2018) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@ Aेेपेजंदज. त्महपेजतंत

7 ITA No. 1158/JP/2018 M/s. Shree Ganpati Traders, 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 →