KARUNAKAR REDDY SUDHAKAR DUVVURU,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 25/HYD/2022Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 March 2022AY 2009-103 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that there was no cogent explanation for the significant delay between the withdrawal of the section 264 petition and the filing of the appeal before the CIT(A). The assessee's argument regarding the payment of self-assessment tax did not justify the delay.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of over 3 years. The assessee's section 264 petition was withdrawn on March 7, 2017, and self-assessment tax was paid on October 3, 2019, with the appeal filed on May 9, 2020.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned due to a lack of reasonable explanation from the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 264

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “SMC”, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA

For Respondent: DR YVST Sai
Hearing: 02/03/2022Pronounced: 04/03/2022

O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. This assessee’s appeal arises from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 11, Hyderabad’s order dt.24.01.2022 in case No.10004/2020-21 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

The assessee’s sole substantive grievance challenges the CIT(A)’s findings not condoning the corresponding delay in filing the lower appeal of more than 3 years for want of reasonable explanation in support thereof. I interalia notice in this factual backdrop that the Assessing Officer had framed his section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 assessment in issue on 31.08.2016 followed by the assessee’s section 264 petition dt.15.11.2016 which stood withdrawn on 07.03.2017 followed by payment of his self- assessment tax on 03.10.2019 and institution of the assessee’s appeal before the CIT(A) on 09.05.2020; respectively. That being the case, there is no cogent explanation from the assessee’s side for the delay of almost thee years between the CIT(A)’s section 264 withdrawal order dt.07.03.2017 and institution of the lower appeal on 09.05.2020 in above terms. I make it clear that hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) as considered in University of Delhi Vs. Union of India, Civil Appeal Nos.9488 & 9489/2019 dt.17.12.2019 hold that all technical aspects must make way for cause of substantial justice provided the assessee offers reasonable cause in its condonation averments. Learned counsel has sought to buttress the point that the assessee could pay self-assessment tax only on 03.10.2019. He fails to dispute that institution of assessee’s appeal was well beyond the prescribed time limit from the said clinching date as well. I therefore find merit in Revenue’s arguments supporting the learned CIT(A)’s lower appellate findings declining to condone the impugned delay.

3.

This assessee’s appeal is dismissed in above terms.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 4th March, 2022.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →