SARVAPRIYA CLUB A UNIT OF SARVAPRIYA CO-OP. HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 32(3), NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not examined the recent affidavit from the assessee's President and other contentions. Therefore, the matter of condonation of delay required reconsideration.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed as time-barred by 229 days. The assessee cited wrong advice from a deceased Chartered Accountant as the reason for the delay.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was sufficiently explained and should be condoned.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “SMC”: DELHI
Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI
This appeal by assessee has been directed against the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals)-32, New Delhi dated 25.11.2019 for AY 2015-16.
I have heard Ld. Representatives of both the parties and perused the orders of authorities below.
2 ITA.No.499/Del./2020
The Ld. CIT(A) noted in the impugned order that appeal is time barred by 229 days. Ld. CIT(A) has considered the petition for condonation of delay in which it was mentioned that due to wrong advice of Late Chartered Accountant Shri S.K. Gupta, appeal could not be filed. Ld. CIT(A), however, did not consider it to be reasonable cause for failure to file the appeal within the period of limitation. Therefore, appeal of assessee was dismissed being time barred.
Ld. Counsel for assessee has referred to affidavit of the President of the assessee society dated 16.10.2020 in which it is stated that the assessee society has engaged Late Shri S.K.
Gupta, Chartered Accountant for handing the tax matter but due to his poor health he could not deal with the matter of the assessee properly and ultimately he has expired on 23.05.2018. Therefore, this appeal could not be filed.
Affidavit is supported by death certificate of the Chartered Accountant. Ld. Counsel for assessee also submitted that issue on merit may be covered by various decisions in favour
3 ITA.No.499/Del./2020 of the assessee. He has, therefore, submitted that nobody will get benefit in not filing the appeal within the period of limitation.
Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances and now recent affidavit filed of President of the assessee society which is not examined by the Ld. CIT(A) and other contentions now raised by Ld. Counsel for assessee, I am of the view that the matter with regard to condonation of delay requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). In view of the above, I set aside the impugned order and restore the appeal of assessee to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with direction to re- decide the issue of condonation of delay in filing the appeal before him sympathetically considering the explanation of the assessee now raised before the Tribunal. Ld. CIT(A) shall give reasonable, sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
4 ITA.No.499/Del./2020
In the result, the appeal of assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
