ADARSH CONSTRUCTIONS & ENGG,SANGRUR vs. ITO, SANGRUR

PDF · subscribers

ITA 130/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 September 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (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 lapse in filing the online appeal and set aside the order of the CIT(A). The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on its own merits. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which had dismissed the appeal as time-barred. The assessment order was passed in 2019, and the appeal before CIT(A) was filed in 2023. However, the assessee had filed a physical appeal within time, while the online appeal was delayed.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal as time-barred when a physical appeal was filed within time, and can the Tribunal condone the delay in online filing?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Vibhore Garg, CA

For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR

Hearing: 11.09.2025Pronounced: 15.09.2025

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण,च�डीगढ़ �यायपीठ, च�डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ �नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Adarsh Constructions & Engg., The ITO, # 6, Mann Colony, Sangrur, Vs Sangrur. Punjab. �थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AANFA8995M अपीलाथ�/Appellant ��यथ�/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Vibhore Garg, CA Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 11.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 15.09.2025 PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, VP

The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 23.12.2024 passed for assessment year 2012-13.

It emerges out from the record that assessment order was passed on 30.12.2019. According to the ld. CIT (Appeals), the appeal was filed on 03.03.2023, hence ld. CIT (Appeals) A.Y.2012-13 2 treated the appeal as time barred and dismissed it. However, perusal of the record would reveal that assessee has filed a physical appeal within time and only online appeal could not be filed within time. We condone this lapse, if any committed by the assessee and set aside the order of ld. CIT (Appeals) with a direction that appeal be decided on merit.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 15.09.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →