A V ORGANICS LLP,VADODARA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(1), VADODARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 296/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 May 2025AY 2020-21Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before it, noting the assessee's explanation regarding the former AR's non-compliance. The Revenue had no objection to setting aside the matter.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in manufacturing and trading of Black Alkaline Drink, declared a loss for AY 2020-21, which was met with disallowances. The assessee's appeal to CIT(A) was dismissed due to delay, and subsequently, the appeal to the Tribunal was also delayed.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal can be condoned due to the non-compliance of the former AR, and if the matter should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH

Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

ITA No: 296/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-21 A V Organics LLP Income Tax Officer 407-409, The Emerald, Ward-1(2)(1), Nr. Chakali Circle, Vs Vadodara Vadodara-390007 Gujarat PAN: ABLFA3351L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, A.R. Revenue Represented: Ms. Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 30-04-2025 Date of pronouncement : 02-05-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the exparte appellate order dated 03.10.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2020-21.

A.Y. 2020-21 Page No 2 A V Organics LLP Vs. ITO

2.

Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a Firm engaged in manufacturing and trading of Black Alkaline Drink. For the Asst. Year 2020-21, assessee filed its Return of Income on 23-11-2020 declaring a loss of Rs.4,40,07,586/-. Assessment was completed by making the following disallowances: (a) Disallowance of unsecured loan Rs. 9,45,000/- (b) Deferred Revenue expenditure Rs. 86,28,604/- (c) Salary expenses Rs.19,29,961/-

3.

Aggrieved against the same, assessee filed an appeal with the delay of 122 days. Hence Ld. CIT(A) not admitted the appeal.

4.

Aggrieved against the appellate order, assessee filed an appeal before this Tribunal with the delay of 38 days. The assessee by way of Notarized Affidavit explained the delay as follows: “2. That, the assessee LLP firm handed over all the necessary details and documents to Mr. Jenil Shah to file an Appeal before the CIT(A) against the order u/s 143(3), He/She/It has filed an appeal before CIT(A) on 25.02.2023 with request application for condonation of delay in filling the appeal. 3. That, ongoing through the grounds of appeal

filed before CIT(A), it is seen that the then AR has not raised ground for relief on account of disallowance of Differed Revenue Expenditure to the tune of Rs.86,28,604/-. The assessee LLP firm has provided all the necessary details and documents to the then AR for making the due compliances before the CIT (A). He was the solely responsible person knowing the facts & status of appeal matters of the undersigned assessee firm.

4. That, the assessee firm is under the impression that, the then AR has complied the notices issued u/s 250 of the I.T. Act. However, it comes to the knowledge the same has not been complied when the assessee LLP firm received Appellate Order dismissing the appeal on the ground of non- compliance.

A.Y. 2020-21 Page No 3 A V Organics LLP Vs. ITO

5. That, the assessee LLP firm tried to download the closure order of CIT(A) but due to technical error the order could not download. A copy of screenshot is part of this affidavit. Vis a vis, the assessee LLP firm has applied for certified copy from the JAO. The appeal before CIT(A) again can to be filed after receipt of order of Hon'ble CIT(A) from JAO. Therefore, the appeal may kindly be treated as filed in time.

6. That, the non-compliance before CIT(A) is on part of our then AR who has not taken care of any notice issued by the department. Therefore, the assessee LL.P firm has appointed new AR and the work of appeal to CIT(A) is assign to the new CA. The facts narrated above are true and correct to the best of the undersigned's knowledge and belief.”

5.

Further the assessee also filed a Paper Book running to 59 pages carrying the ledger account of unsecured creditor, salary expenses, etc. Thus Ld. Counsel pleaded to condone the delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal.

6.

Ld. Sr. D.R. appearing for the Revenue has no objection in setting aside the matter back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to redo the assessment.

7.

Recording the above submissions of both parties, the order passed by the Lower Authorities are here setaside with the direction to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to pass fresh assessment order by giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee should file all necessary documents before Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for passing order on merits.

A.Y. 2020-21 Page No 4 A V Organics LLP Vs. ITO

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 02-05-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 02/05/2025 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद

More judgments on Section 144B

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →