RATNA HIRO REKHANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO (IT)-2(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7879/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 June 2021AY 2011-122 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, while acknowledging the ex-parte nature of the lower order, decided to grant the assessee another opportunity. The appeal was set aside to the CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication, with a direction to the assessee to explain the delay and present their case on merit.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT aggrieved by a penalty confirmed under Section 271(1)(c). The assessee did not appear for the hearing, and the appeal was not admitted by the lower appellate authority due to unexplained delay in filing.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to explain the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and to present their case on merit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale, Ld. Sr. DR

O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aggrieved by confirmation of certain penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12, the assessee is in further appeal before us. Though none appeared for assessee, however, after going through impugned order, it could be observed that the assessee could not explain delayed filing of appeal before learned first appellate authority.

Accordingly, the appeal was not admitted. The impugned order is an ex- parte order.

2.

The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of appeal. However, keeping in view the principle of natural justice, the bench deem it fit to grant another opportunity to the assessee to defend his stand. Accordingly, the appeal is set-aside to Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication with a direction to the assessee to explain the delay and substantiate his stand on merit failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the adjudication of the appeal.

3.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 01st June, 2021. Sd/- Sd/- (Mahavir Singh) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) उपाध्यक्ष / Vice President लेखा दस्य / Accountant Member मुिंबई Mumbai; सदनािंक Dated : 01/06/2021 Sr.PS, Jaisy Varghese आदेशकीप्रधिधलधपअग्रेधर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी/ The Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A) 4. आयकरआयुक्त/ CIT– concerned 5. सवभागीयप्रसतसनसध, आयकरअपीलीयअसधकरण, मुिंबई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गार्डफाईल / Guard File आदेशाि सार/ BY ORDER,

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →