What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and directed the CIT(A) to pass a detailed order on merits after hearing the assessee. The assessee was also directed to provide all necessary details.

The assessee's appeals against quantum and penalty orders were filed with a delay before the CIT(A). The assessee was not represented before the AO or the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to the delay without deciding on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) should dismiss an appeal solely on the grounds of delay without considering the merits of the case, and whether the delay should be condoned.

Mr.Nanjunda Renuka Aradhya vs ACIT | ITAT Bangalore 2020

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI. B.R. BASKARAN & SMT. BEENA PILLAI

For Appellant: Shri None

For Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

Date of Hearing : 05-11-2020 Date of Pronouncement : 25-11-2020 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeals has been filed by assessee against quantum and penalty orders dated 15/09/2017 and 18/09/2017 respectively passed by Ld.CIT(A)-7, Bangalore for assessment year 2013-14. 2. We note that assessment order passed in quantum proceeding without hearing assessee as none had appeared before Ld.AO. We note that even the penalty order passed by Ld.AO is without hearing assessee as none had appeared.

Before Ld.CIT(A) also assessee was not represented by any one.

We note that before Ld.CIT(A), appeal was filed against order passed under section 144 with a delay, which was not condoned. In our view Ld.CIT(A) should not dismiss appeal without deciding the issues on merits. We therefore condoned the delay of 152 days in filing the appeal before Ld.CIT(A).

We direct Ld.CIT(A) to pass a detailed order on merits having regards to the evidences filed by assessee. Assessee is also directed to file all requisite details in support of its claim.

We therefore remand both the appeals back to Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to pass orders after hearing assessee in accordance with law. Accordingly grounds raised

by assessee in both the appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. In the result appeals filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 25th Nov, 2020 Sd/- Sd/- (B.R BASKARAN) (BEENA PILLAI) Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated, the 25th Nov, 2020. /Vms/ Copy to:

MR.NANJUNDA RENUKA ARADHYA,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(2)(1), BANGALORE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments