SANTANU DAS,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-25(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2582/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 May 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) ought to have condoned the delay and not dismissed the appeal on a technical ground, especially since the assessment order was ex parte. The Tribunal found it appropriate to set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and AO and remit the matter back to the AO for de novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in real estate development, filed a return declaring a loss. The case was selected for scrutiny due to a property purchased at a value lower than the stamp duty value. The Assessing Officer (AO) added the difference as income under Section 56(2)(x) of the Act. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was delayed and dismissed on technical grounds without a hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on the technical ground of delay without condoning it, and whether an ex parte assessment order warrants a de novo assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 56(2)(x),Section 3,Section 5

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

order

: 28-May-2025 ORDER

PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2020-21 dated 11.11.2024, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 27.09.2022.

4.

The Ld. CIT(A) has also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Dabra Vs Sunder Singh & Anr (SLP (C) 15793/2019) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court have held that belated appeals can only be condoned, when sufficient reason is shown before the court for the delay. The appellant who seeks condonation of delay therefore must explain the delay of each day. It is true that the courts should not be pedantic in their approach while condoning the delay, and explanation of each day's delay should not be taken literally,

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →