CHINKI TREXIM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 9(1),, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 952/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 July 2025AY 2012-2013Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the 397-day delay in filing the appeal after the assessee provided sufficient reasons and the Senior DR did not object. The Tribunal noted the assessee's categorical admission that they did not opt for the VSVS Scheme for the impugned assessment year (framed under Section 143/147) but for an assessment under Section 143(3). Consequently, the issues were restored to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication on merits, with directions for the assessee to cooperate.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, which was delayed by 397 days. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal, holding that the assessee opted for the VSVS Scheme based on Income Tax Data Base. The assessee contended that they had not opted for the VSVS Scheme for the impugned assessment year, which was framed under Section 143/147, but for another assessment order passed under Section 143(3).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee had opted for the VSVS Scheme for the impugned assessment year framed under Section 143/147, and if the issues should be restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143,Section 147,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA

Hearing: 03/07/2025Pronounced: 03/07/2025

O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 24.01.2024, passed by the Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Hyderabad, for the assessment year 2012-2013.

2.

Shri Miraz D. Shah, ld. AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, ld. Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.

3.

The appeal of the assessee is barred by 397 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit stating sufficient reasons for delay which are not found false. Ld.Sr. DR also did not raise any serious objection. Accordingly, the delay of 397 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing.

4.

It was the submission of the ld. AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding that as per the Income Tax Data Base, the assessee adopted for VSVS Scheme and filed relevant form. It 2 ITANo.952/KOL/2025 was the submission by the ld. AR that the assessee has not opted VSVS Scheme against the impugned assessment year before the ld.CIT(A). It was the prayer that the issue may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

5.

In reply, ld.Sr. DR also acceded that the issues may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A).

6.

I have considered the rival submissions. As it has been categorically admitted on behalf of the assessee that the assessee has not opted VSVS Scheme in respect of the impugned assessment year, which is an assessment framed u/s.143/147 of the Act and the VSVS Scheme opted by the assessee in respect of the assessment order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act. This being so, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of Id. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the ld. CIT(A) in the readjudication proceedings, positively.

7.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 03/07/2025. (जाजज माथन) (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 03/07/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →