What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The assessee's explanation for the delay, due to the transition of tax personnel and misplacement of files, was accepted.

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 68 days. The delay was attributed to the departure of the tax executive managing the case, leading to the misplacement of the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee should be condoned.

M/S. Shell Mrpl Aviation Fuels… vs ACIT | ITAT Bangalore 2021

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN & SHRI B. R. BASKARAN

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, Advocate

For Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh, Sr. DR(ITAT), Bengaluru

Hearing: 06.09.2021Pronounced: 08.09.2021

Per N. V. Vasudevan, Vice President:

This is an appeal by the assessee against the Order dated 08.03.2018 of CIT(A)-6, Bengaluru, relating to Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. There is a delay of 68 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. The reasons for the delay have been explained in an affidavit dated 07.03.2019 filed by the Director of the assessee. It has been stated therein that at the time of due date for filing the appeal against the order of the CIT(A), the tax executive employed by the assessee who has been managing the representation before the lower authority left the services and was serving notice period. In the course of transition, some of the tax files were misplaced and one such file contained the impugned order of the CIT(A). The earlier tax executive did not inform the senior personnel of the

M/S. SHELL MRPL AVIATION FUELS AND SERVICES LTD,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BENGALURU

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments