SHOBHA,TIPTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TIPTUR

ITA 152/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 June 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI (Vice President)4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was for sufficient cause, citing the COVID-19 lockdown and the CA's preoccupation. The CIT(A)'s order was reversed, the delay was condoned, and the case was restored to the CIT(A) for examination on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which dismissed her appeal as time-barred. The original assessment order for AY 2017-18 added Rs. 5,70,000 as unexplained cash credits. The CIT(A) had not condoned the delay in filing the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was condonable, and whether the addition of Rs. 5,70,000 as unexplained cash credit was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 271AAC(1),Section 250,Section 133(6),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 249(2)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI

For Appellant: Shri Gokul, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Hearing: 05.06.2025Pronounced: 25.06.2025

Per Prashant Maharishi, Vice President

1.

This appeal is filed by Smt. Shobha, Proprietrix of S.C. Veeranna & Co., Tiptur [the assessee/appellant] against the appellate order passed by the Addl./Jt. CIT(Appeals)-2, Noida [ld. CIT(A)] dated 30.11.2024 wherein the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] by the ITO, Ward 1, Tiptur [ld. AO] dated 05.12.2019 was dismissed as time barred as delay of 4 months was not condoned.

2.

The assessee is aggrieved and has preferred the following grounds of appeal: -

“1. The Order of the learned Commissioner passed under section 250 of the Act is opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →