THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU vs. SHRI. M A SIDDIQUE, MANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 726/BANG/2020Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 December 2021AY 2014-154 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reason cited by the Revenue for the delay, i.e., inadvertent mistake on the part of the AO, was not a credible reason. Consequently, the delay was not condoned.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals belatedly with a significant delay of 325 days. The Revenue sought condonation of delay, citing inadvertence by the Assessing Officer in not incorporating the fact of a pending prosecution against the assessee.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in filing the Revenue's appeals should be condoned based on the reasons provided.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not Applicable

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C’’ BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI B.R BASKARAN & SHRI BEENA PILLAI

For Appellant: Smt. Sheethal, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)
Hearing: 08.12.2021Pronounced: 08.12.2021

O R D E R PER BENCH:- The Revenue has filed all these appeals challenging the orders dated 18/10/2019 passed by ld.CIT(A)-2, Panaji and they relate to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2016-17.

2.

All the appeals have been filed by the Revenue belatedly with a delay of 325 days in each of the appeal. We notice from Form No.36 filed by the Revenue, the orders passed by ld.CIT(A) were received by the Revenue on 20/11/2019. Hence the appeals should have been filed latest by 19/01/2020. However, all these appeals have been filed by the Revenue on 09/12/2020 only. We also ITA Nos.724 - 726/Bang/2020 & & 730/Bang/2020 notice that the limitation date has expired much prior to the starting of lock down due to pandemic in India.

3.

We heard parties on the preliminary issue of delay. Before the Tribunal, the Revenue has filed petitions for all the years under consideration requesting the Bench to condone the delay. All the petitions have been drafted alike and they read as under:-

“2. An appeal against the orders of the CIT(A)-2, Panaji in the above case, is sought to be filed vide reference above as per directions of the Pr. Commissioner of Income tax (Central), Bengaluru, mentioned above.

3. It is submitted that the appellate orders were received on 20-11-2019 and no appeals filed within the prescribed period. The fact of prosecution launched by the Investigation Wing against the assessee, was inadvertently missed the attention of the Assessing Officer to incorporate while submitting the scrutiny report dated 18.10.2019. In view of the above, the orders of the CIT(A) was accepted due to low tax effect.

4. Since the prosecution launched by the Investigation Wing is still pending before the JMFC Court, Mangalore, this case is covered under the exception as provided in Para 10(f) of CBDT Circular in F.No 279/Misc/142/2007- IT.J(Pt) dated 20.08.2018 to file further appeal in such circumstances. Hence it is requested that the delay may kindly be condoned and further appeal admitted for a decision on merits as per the grounds of appeal.”

4.

A perusal of the above said petition would show that the Revenue has not cited any credible reason for the delay. It appears that the tax effect involved in each of these appeals is less than the ITA Nos.724 - 726/Bang/2020 & & 730/Bang/2020 monetary limit prescribed by CBDT for filing appeals before the Tribunal. Accordingly, it is stated that, by inadvertence, it has escaped the attention of the AO that the appeals under consideration are covered by exception prescribed in CBDT Circular dated 20/8/2018. The above cited reason, i.e., inadvertent mistake on the part of the AO to file appeal in time, in our view, is not proper reason for the delay.

5.

Under these set of facts, we are of the view that the delay in filing these appeals does not deserve to be condoned. Accordingly, we reject the petitions filed by the Revenue in all the years under consideration and refuse to condone the delay.

6.

Since we have refused to condone the delay, we do not find it necessary to dispose the grounds urged by the Revenue before us.

7.

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed in limine as not admitted.

Order pronounced in the open court on 8th December 2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →