SUPER FARM PRODUCTS PRIVATE LTD,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, CORP WARD 2, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the reasons cited in the condonation application were general and lacked cogent reasons for the delay in filing the appeal. The CIT(A)'s findings were found to be correct and justified.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 1759 days against an intimation order. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, rejecting the condonation petition due to lack of bonafide explanation and sufficient cause for the delay.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned despite the lack of a reasonable and bonafide explanation.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi&
O R D E R
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 19.09.2024 passed by the Addl/JCIT (A)-11, Mumbai for the assessment year 2018-19.
At the outset, we note that the return filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] and an addition of ₹.17,82,203/- was made to the total income disallowing the exemption claimed under section 10 of the Act vide intimation order under section 143(1) of the Act dated 02.07.2019. Against the intimation order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 1759 days in filing the appeal. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by rejecting the condonation petition on the ground that there was no bonafide explanation and not given sufficient cause for the inordinate delay of 1759 days in filing the appeal.
The ld. AR Ms. Sandhyaarthi, C.A submits that against the intimation order, the assessee preferred rectification petition under section 154 of the Act for correcting the mistake apparent on record. She further submits that since the Assessing Officer rejected the rectification without any reasons, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 1759 days in filing the appeal. The ld. AR prayed that the delay may be condoned and the matter may be adjudicated on merits.
The ld. DR Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT(A) strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A).
Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the impugned order at para 5.1, we note that the 3 intimation order under section 143(1) of the Act was passed and served on the assessee on 02.07.2019. It is clear from para 5.2 of the impugned order that the assessee preferred rectification application on 23.01.2024 and the CPC has processed rectification application and rejected its claim. The ld. CIT(A) held that reasons cited in the condonation application is general in nature, without offering any cogent reason for the delay in filing the appeal and there is no reasonable cause cited which prevented the assessee to file the appeal within the due date. Upon perusal of the contents of the condonation petition which was reproduced in para 5.2 at page 5 the impugned order, we find the reason stated by the ld. CIT(A) are correct and justified. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
More judgments on Section 10
- Integrated People Development Project… vs CIT Exemptions, ChennaiITA 2970/CHNY/2026[-]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026
- Shivashankrappa Sahukar, Kalaburagi vs ITO, Ward-1, KalaburgaiITA 155/BANG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Jagrutiben Manishbhai Trivedi, Ahmedabad vs ITO Ward 6(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2644/AHD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Jagrutiben Manishbhai Trivedi, Ahmedabad vs ITO Ward 6(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2643/AHD/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- Prabhakar Golkonda, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward - 9(1), HyderabadITA 994/HYD/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026