Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed three appeals against the Addl./JCIT(A) orders for A.Y. 1961-62, primarily challenging the collection of interest under Section 220(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for various assessment years (1950-51 to 1961-62). The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction, stating the matter was not admissible under Section 246A.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 73-day delay in filing the appeals. It upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, ruling that the Addl./JCIT(A) correctly determined it lacked the jurisdiction to adjudicate issues related to High Court directions for reconciliation of dues between the assessee, PCIT, and the administrative division. The appropriate remedy for non-compliance with High Court orders is to approach the High Court again.
Key Issues
Whether the Addl./JCIT(A) has jurisdiction to entertain appeals concerning the collection of interest under Section 220(2) and non-compliance with High Court directions to reconcile outstanding dues; Condonation of delay in filing appeals.
Sections Cited
250, 246, 246A, 220(2), 46
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, JAIPUR
Before: Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL
These three appeals by the assessee are directed against the order of Addl./JCIT (A)-4, Mumbai dated 13/02/2024& 12/02/2024passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal vide for A.Y 1961-62 as under:
1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Additional/Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), A-4, Bombay has grossly erred in not providing opportunity before disposing off the appeal stating it to be not covered u/s. 246/246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and without considering the directions of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court passed in writ petition no.1740/80 dt.05.12.2005 though the appeal was an outcome of the action of AO based upon directions in the writ petition. The order of the CIT Appeals may please be quashed and a further hearing may please be provided on merits of the case.
2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the collection of interest u/s 220(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs.3,01,165/- charged from the assessee for the assessment years 1951-52 to Assessment year 1961-62 as evident from the statement submitted by the TRO to hon'ble High Court without any appropriate provision u/s 46 of the replead act is illegal, against law, without any opportunity and authority under the applicable law under the Income Tax Act, 1922 and the assessee is entitled to the refund of the amount of Rs.301165/-along with interest at compounded rates as decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal vide for A.Y 1961-62 as under:
1 Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Additional/Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), A-4, Bombay has grossly erred in not providing opportunity before disposing off the appeal stating it to be not covered u/s. 246/246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and without considering the directions of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court passed in writ petition no.1740/80 dt.05.12.2005 though the appeal was an outcome of the action of AO based upon directions in the writ petition. The order of the CIT Appeals may please be quashed and a further hearing may please be provided on merits of the case. 2 Under the facts and circumstances of the case the collection of interest u/s. 220(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs. 11,81,319/- charged from the assessee for the assessment years 1950-51 to Assessment year 1961-62 as evident from the statement submitted by the TRO to hon'ble High Court without any appropriate provisions u/s 46 of the replead act is illegal, against law, without any opportunity and authority under the applicable law under the Income Tax Act, 1922 and the assessee is entitled to the refund of the amount of Rs. 1181319/-along with compensation and interest at compounded rates as decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal vide for A.Y 1961-62 as under:
1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Additional/Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), A-4, Bombay has grossly erred in not providing opportunity before disposing off the appeal stating it to be not covered u/s. 246/246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and without considering the directions of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court passed in writ petition no.1740/80 dt.05.12.2005 though the appeal was an outcome of the action of AO based upon directions in the writ petition. The order of the CIT Appeals may please be quashed and a further hearing may please be provided on merits of the case.
2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the collection of interest u/s. 220(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs.96,512/- charged from the assessee for the assessment years 1950-51 to Assessment year 1961-62 as evident from the statement submitted by the TRO to Hon'ble High Court without any appropriate provisions u/s 46 of the replead act is illegal, against law, without any opportunity and authority under the applicable law under the Income Tax Act, 1922 and the assessee is entitled to the refund of the amount of Rs.96,512/- along with compensation and interest at compounded rates as decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
2. There are three appeals filed by the assessee vide 899 and 900/JPR/2024. All the three appeals were filed against the order of Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-4 Mumbai vide his order dated 12.02.2024 and 13-02-2024 respectively.it is pertinent to mention that all the three appeals are time barred by 73 days and for the condonation of the same the assessee filed an application for condonation of the delay along with duly attested affidavit. We have observed the application of the assessee along with the affidavit filed. In view of the facts narrated in the application we do not see any malafide at the end of the assessee in such delay. Further assessee does not look like a casual one were this condonation of delay can be denied. In view of the above the delay in the filing of appeals is condoned.
3. We have gone through the order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-4 Mumbai and observed that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed solely on the ground that the matter before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-4 Mumbai is not admissible before him in view of sec 246A of the act. In addition to this we have refer the paper -book submitted by the assessee containing various communication between the assessee and ITO Ward (3) (2), Jaipur along with copy of honorable high court order in writ petition no. 1744/80(vide dated 05.12.2005). In addition to this we have gone through the order of honorable high court in the case of assessee vide dated 04.10.1985.
4. It is observed by the bench that writ petitions filed by the assessee and consequential order by the honorable high court as mentioned (supra) are subject matter of the concerned Principle Commissioner of Income Tax and the income tax authorities under him. We have gone through the directions of the honorable high courtwere it was directed to reconcile the amount due towards the assessee from AY 1950-51 to 1961-62. We have gone through the order of Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-4 Mumbai also and found the same to be correct as the matter under consideration is between the assessee and the administrative/assessment division of the department.
5. As the directions of the honorable high courtis addressed to the AO and in- turn the PCIT. If they are not complying with the directions of the honorable high court the only remedy available to the assessee is to approach the honorable high court again and as far as the scope of powers vested with the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-4 Mumbai is concerned, certainly he can’t adjudicate this issue. In the light of above we do not find any deficiency in the order Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-4 Mumbai which requires intervention of this bench. In the result order of the Ld.Addl./JCIT (A)-4 Mumbai is confirmed and appeals of the assessee are dismiss.
In the result, three appeals of the assessee are dismissed.
The Order is pronounced in the open court on the 7th day of August 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI) (GAGAN GOYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Jaipur, िदनांक/Dated: 07/08/2025 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ�/The Appellant , 2. �ितवादी/ The Respondent. आयकर आयु� CIT 3. 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., Sr.DR., ITAT, 5. गाड� फाइल/Guard file.