INDIUM SOFTWARE (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP. CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 847/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 June 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 1970 days, finding the reasons compelling and in the interest of natural justice, citing the Supreme Court's general exemption for limitation periods due to Covid-19. The case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, subject to the assessee paying Rs.5,000/- as costs to the State Legal Aid Authority.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against an order passed under Section 143(1) was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a delay of 1970 days in filing. The assessee explained the delay was caused by pursuing alternate remedies under Section 154 and the widespread disruption and limitation extensions due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in not condoning a 1970-day delay in filing an appeal, considering the assessee pursued alternate remedies and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on statutory limitation periods.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 154,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA

Hearing: 03.06.2025Pronounced: 18.06.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:

1.

1. This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT (A)-1, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld.CIT(A)‘), Delhi, dated 10.03.2025 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as ‘AY‘) 2017-18.

2.

At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee brought to our notice that the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal by not condoning the delay in filing of appeal before him, even though, there were compelling reasons for the cause of delay, which has not been appreciated by the Ld.CIT(A)

1.

in the right spirit, which omission has led to failure of justice. According to the Ld.AR, the assessee had filed its Return of Income (RoI) declaring an income of Rs.6,20,99,860/- which was processed by the CPC and intimation u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) was passed on 13.02.2019 determining taxable total income at Rs.6,52,52,210/- by making four (4) specific disallowances.

The assessee filed rectification application u/s.154 of the Act which was not acted upon and later the CPC reiterated the disallowance by order dated 22.09.2022. Thereafter, the assessee again preferred rectification application before the jurisdictional AO, which was also disposed of on 29.04.2024. Then, the assessee is noted to have immediately filed the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). But finding the delay of ‘1970’ days in filing of appeal, he dismissed the appeal without admitting it. We don’t countenance this action of the Ld.CIT(A), since we note that there were two reasons given by the assessee explaining the delay, one was that it was pursuing alternate remedy u/s.154 of the Act; and second reason was that in the meanwhile Covid-19 pandemic struck India; and the day to day activities came to a grinding halt and which event led the Hon’ble Supreme Court to pass order in Miscellaneous Petition No.21 of 2022 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020, wherein their Lordships has extended limitation applicable to all proceedings in respect of Courts and Tribunals across the country on account of spread of Covid-19 infections w.e.f.15.03.2020, till 28.02.2022 and said limitation has been extended from time to time up to May, 2022. In view of the above general exemption provided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court extending limitation period applicable for all proceedings before Courts and Tribunals and thus, considering facts and circumstances of the case and also in the interest of natural justice, we are inclined to condone the delay in filing of appeal subject to assessee remitting Rs.5,000/- as costs which the assessee should remit to the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court, and produce necessary proof of depositing of the same before the Ld.CIT(A), for which, we rely on the following decisions also: • CIT v. K.S.P. Shanmugavel Nadar – [1985] 153 ITR 596 (Madras) • Hosanna Ministries v. ITO – [2017] 80 taxmann.com 173 (Madras)

3.

Having condoned the delay of ‘1,970’ days in filing of appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), we restore the appeal back to his file i.e. the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication of grounds of appeal raised by the assessee as per sub- section (6) of section 250 of the Act. The assessee is directed to file all the relevant documents and written submissions in support of its grounds

4.

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

Order pronounced on the 18th day of June, 2025, in Chennai.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →