SMT. FATHIMUNNISA (C ZAMRUTH PASHA KHURESH, LEGAL HEIRS OF THE FATHIMUNNISA (DECEASED)),BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1(2)(2), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1711/BANG/2019Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 October 2020AY 2015-164 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 ITAT condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) due to the peculiar circumstances, including the assessee's death. The order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the issues were restored to his file for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay in filing. The assessee had expired before the CIT(A) passed the order, and the legal heir faced difficulties in pursuing the matter. The appeal before the ITAT was also filed with a delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned due to the death of the assessee and the complexities faced by the legal heir. Whether the appeal should be adjudicated on merits after condoning the delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVANAND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN

For Appellant: Shri G. Satyanarayana, A.R
For Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Hearing: 29.09.2020Pronounced: 01.10.2020

PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 28.1.2019 passed by Ld. CIT(A)-1 Bengaluru and it relates to assessment year 2015-16.

2.

The appeal is barred by limitation by 124 days. The assessee has filed a petition before the bench requesting it to condone the delay. The Ld A.R submitted that this appeal is being now pursued by the legal heir of the assessee, since the assessee has expired on 30-10-2018. He submitted that, since the assessee has expired,

Page 2 of 4 she could not appear before Commissioner, which led to passing of ex-parte order by Ld. CIT(A). He further submitted that the legal heir took some time to understand the complexities of the matter and to file appeal before Tribunal. Accordingly, he submitted that the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal is on account of reasonable cause and accordingly he has prayed that the delay in filing appeal before Tribunal may be condoned.

3.

We heard Ld. D.R. on this preliminary issue and perused the record. Having regard to the submissions made in the affidavit and by Ld A.R, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.

4.

We heard the parties and perused the record. We notice that the Ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal refusing to condone the delay of 45 days in filing appeal before him. He further confirmed the disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 54 of the Act on the reasoning that no material was placed either before him or before the AO. However, as per the affidavit filed by the legal heir, the assessee has expired on 30.10.2018, whereas the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order on 28.1.2019. It is noticed that the Ld. CIT(A) has fixed the hearing on 17.1.2019 and 28.1.2019 i.e. after the expiry of the assessee. We notice that the assessee has filed a petition before Ld CIT(A) requesting him to condone the delay of 45 days in filing appeal before him, wherein it is stated that the appeal could not be filed in time due to professional exigency. However, the Ld. CIT(A) has refused to condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.

5.

The Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee is an old lady and she could not properly represent before the tax authorities due to lack of proper assistance. He further submitted that grave injustice

Page 3 of 4 will be caused to the assessee, if the appeal is not disposed on merits.

6.

Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the delay of 45 days in filing appeal before Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be condoned. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing appeal before Ld. CIT(A).

7.

Since the Ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the appeal on merits, we are of the view that, in the interest of natural justice, all the issues require to be restored his file for adjudicating them on merits. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file.

8.

We also direct the assessee to extend full cooperation to LD CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal.

9.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 1st Oct, 2020.

More judgments on Section 54

All 1,745 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →