JAYGANGA EXIM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,INDORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the period for compliance with notices fell within the Covid-19 lockdown, making it impossible for the assessee to comply. Therefore, the CIT(A) ought not to have confirmed the assessment order.
What were the facts?
The assessee's total income was assessed at Rs. 1,50,59,895/-, a significant increase from the returned income of Rs. 0/-. Additions were made for repayment of loan and purchase of stock. The assessee's appeals to the CIT(A) were dismissed.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessment order and the CIT(A)'s order are valid when the assessee could not comply with notices due to the Covid-19 pandemic?
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 253,Section 144,Section 69C,Section 246A,Section 142(1),Section 129,Section 271(1)(d)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: DR. MANISH BORAD & SHRI PARESH M JOSHI
Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.:
This is an appeal filed by the Assessee Under Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for sake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The assessee is aggrieved by order in first appeal Number: CIT(A)-3, Bhopal/IT/12262/2017-
18 dated 06.12.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A), passed U/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order”. Jayganga Exim India Pvt Ltd. A.Y. 2018-19 The relevant Assessment Year is 2018-19 and the corresponding
previous year period is from 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2018. 2. FACTUAL MATRIX
1 That as and by way of an assessment order m
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 69C
- Jitendrakumar Bhikhabhai Shrimali, Mehsana vs ITO Ward 1, MehsaanaITA 1290/AHD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Sonu Jain, Agra vs ITO WD(1)(1)(2), AgraITA 671/AGR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Mritunjay Singh, Kudra vs AO, SasaramITA 454/PAT/2026[2017-2018]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2017-2018
- Shantilal Mafaji Kachchhava, Banaskantha vs ITO WD 1 Palanpur, PalanpurITA 2256/AHD/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Madhusudhan Gade, Nizamabad vs ITO., Ward-1, NizamabadITA 379/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Giri Paints vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026
- Rahul Radheshyam Chauhan vs. Union Of INDIA Thru The Sec. Ministry Of Law And Justice And OrsBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- S.Murugesan vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Annai Garden vs. The Commercial Tax Officer / The State Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Yadeshwar Mallekedi vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 15 Oct 2026