SHRI SUNIL SHAMDAS MAGANI,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(5), VADODARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 265/AHD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 June 2018AY 2010-112 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was due to a bonafide reason, even if caused by a lapse in communication. A hyper-technical view should be avoided in such matters.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was rejected as time-barred. The assessee claimed non-receipt of assessment orders and notices due to a change of address which was not communicated to the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing an appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned when the assessee claims non-receipt of orders due to a change of address.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

ITA No. 265/Ahd/2017 Sunil Shamdas Magnani Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2010-11 Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar, AM and Ms. Madhumita Roy, JM] ITA No. 265/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sunil Shamdas Magnani ............…………......Appellant C-211, Second Floor, Lokhangan, Nr. Shastri Nagar, Guru Govindsingh Marg, Mulund Colony, Mumbai-400 082 [PAN : ADTPM 4550 F] Vs. Income Tax Officer ...........................Respondent Ward-2(6), Vadodara

Appearances by:

None for the Appellant VK Singh for the Respondent

Date of concluding the hearing : 22.06.2018 Date of pronouncing the order : 26.06.2018

O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, AM:

1.

By way of this appeal, the assessee-appellant has challenged correctness of the order dated 18th August, 2016 passed by the by the CIT(A)-4, Vadodara in the matter of assessment under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2010-11.

2.

The grievance of the assessee in substance is that the learned CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the appeal as time barred and declined to deal with the same on merits.

3.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee; however, we have heard the learned Departmental Representative and perused the material available on record.

4.

As evident from the plain reading of the impugned order, the case of the assessee has been that the assessment order and notices etc were not served upon him since the assessee had shifted his residence from “C-27, Samrajya Duplex, Munj Mahuda, Akota Road, Vadodara” to “C-211, Second Floor, Lokhangan, Near Shastri Nagar, Guru Govindsingh Marg, Mulund Colony, Mumbai-400082”. Learned CIT(A), however, has rejected this reason on the ground that the assessee ought to have informed the Assessing Officer and his lapse in informing the change of address to the Assessing Officer cannot entitle him for condonation of delay in filing

ITA No. 265/Ahd/2017 Sunil Shamdas Magnani Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2010-11 Page 2 of 2 of appeal. What has been missed out by the learned CIT(A) is that the delay is on account of a bonafide reason even if caused by lapse, and, it is the reason being bonafide that really matters in deciding the issue as to whether the delay should be condoned or not. In our considered view, even though the assessee may perhaps have been at fault in not communicating the change of address to the Assessing Officer, the fact remains that there was a bonafide reason for delay in filing of the appeal before the learned CIT(A) since the assessment order and notices etc were admittedly not received by the assessee in time. In any event, on such matters, a hyper technical view is best avoided. In view of this discussion and bearing in mind entirety of the case, we are of the considered view that the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) should have been condoned by the CIT(A). We, therefore, deem it fit and proper to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) and direct the learned CIT(A) to decide the matter on merits in accordance with the law.

5.

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above. Pronounced in the open court today on the 26th June, 2018

Sd/- Sd/-

Ms. Madhumita Roy Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Ahmedabad, the 26th day of June, 2018 **bt Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad

1.

Date of dictation: ................covered matter....26.06.2018.. 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member: ... 26.06.2018.... 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S.: …26.06.2018... 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for Pronouncement: ... 26.06.2018.... 5. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk : . 29.06.2018……. 6. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk : ……………………………. 7. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order: …. 8. Date of Despatch of the Order: ………………......

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →