JAYSHIVRAY GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAHKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,KOLHAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 608/PUN/2021Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 September 2022AY 2017-184 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 held that the delay was attributable to Covid-19 and directed the NFAC to admit the appeals. The appeals were to be decided on merits after complying with natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessees' appeals were dismissed by the NFAC due to a delay in filing. The delay was attributed to the outbreak of Covid-19.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in filing the appeals should be condoned due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The secondary issue was whether the appeals should be decided on merit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

  • 438 ITR 296
    438 ITR 296 · 2021 · SC
    196 citing
  • 432 ITR 206
    432 ITR 206 · 2020 · SC
    182 citing
  • 421 ITR 314
    421 ITR 314 · SC
    172 citing

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA ROAO & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

Consolidated Appeals (2)

ITA 595/PUN/2021AY 2018-19
ITA 608/PUN/2021AY 2017-18

ORDER PER BENCH These appeals preferred by the above-mentioned assessees as per the captioned matter emanates from the respective orders of the (NFAC) for the respective assessment years as appearing hereinabove, as per the following grounds of appeal. for A.Y. 2018-19 – Arth Nagari Sah. Patsanstha, “1. On the facts and in law, the CIT(A) is not justified in not condoning the delay of 54 days in filing appeal which was due to reasonable cause.

2. On the facts and in law, the CIT(A) is not justified in not condoning the delay of 54 days in filing appeal without considering the decisions of various courts and clarifications issued by CBDT.

3. On the facts and in law, the CIT(A) is not justified in not deciding the issue on merit of allowability of deduction u/s 80P of the Act raised by the appellant.

2 ITA 595 & 608 of 2021 Arth Nagari & Jayshivraj Gramin for A.Y. 2017-18 – Jayshivray Gramin Bigar Sheti Sah. Pat Sanstha, Kolhapur 1. On facts, in circumstances of the case and in law, the NFAC erred in dismissing appeal of the appellant on the ground of rejection of petition for condonation of delay without going into merits of the case of the appellant.

2. On facts in the circumstances of the case and in law, the NFAC erred in refusing to condone the delay in filing appeal without appreciating the fact that appellant was exploring alternate remedy by filing rectification application u/s 154 of the Act.

3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or delete any of the above grounds of appeal.”

2.

The facts and circumstances and the issues involved in both these appeals are absolutely identical and similar. Therefore, these cases were heard together and are disposed of by this consolidated order.

3.

The only issue involved in both these appeals is with respect to rejection of petition for condonation of delay. The NFAC has dismissed the appeals on ground of delay. It is found that the reason of delay is attributable to the outbreak of Covid 19. We therefore, set aside the order of the NFAC and remit the matter back to the file of the NFAC with a direction to admit the appeals by virtue of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314 and decide the appeals on merits after complying with the principles of natural justice.

4.

In the result, both the appeals of the respective assessees are allowed for statistical purposes.

3 ITA 595 & 608 of 2021 Arth Nagari & Jayshivraj Gramin Order pronounced in the open Court on this 29th September 2022.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →