KAUSHALYA AGARWAL TRUST,INDORE vs. CPC BANGLORE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, INDORE

आदेश / O R D E R

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

the order bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-

25/1068505392(1) dated 10.09.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)

which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order”. The

Page 1 of 7

Kaushalya Agarwal Trust ITA No. 890/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2017-18 relevant Assessment Year is 2017-18 and the corresponding

previous year period is from 01.04.2016 to 31.03.2017.

2.1 That as and by way of an rectification order made u/s. 154

r.w.s. 143(1) of the Act, bearing No.

CPC/1718/U5/2101202235 dated 18.10.2022 hereinafter

referred to as the “impugned rectification order” an amount of

Rs.1,61,550/- was quantified as net amount payable. The

assessee was charged maximum marginal rate instead of normal

rate.

2.2 That the assessee being aggrieved by the aforesaid

“impugned rectification order” prefers first appeal u/s 246A

of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the “impugned order”

has dismissed the 1st appeal of the assessee on the grounds and

reasons stated therein.

2.3 That the assessee being aggrieved by the “impugned order”

has preferred the instant second appeal before this Tribunal and

has raised following grounds of appeal in Form No.36 against the

“impugned order” which are as under:-

“1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal filed as time barred without properly appreciating the facts of the case

Page 2 of 7

Kaushalya Agarwal Trust ITA No. 890/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2017-18 and the submissions made. The Learned CIT-(A) failed to consider that the impugned order was actually served on the appellant on a later date, different from the date mentioned on the face of the order, as correctly disclosed in Form 35. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT-(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine and not adjudicating on the merits of the case . 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT-(A) erred in not holding that the assessee trust is entitled to the benefit of Proviso to Section 164 of the Income Tax act, 1961. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT-(A) erred in not holding that the income of the assessee trust is to be taxed as per normal rates of taxes and not the maximum marginal rate of tax as levied by the CPC. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, or withdraw any of the grounds of appeals at the time of hearing”.

3.1 The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on

25.06.2025 when the Ld. AR for and on behalf of the assessee

appeared before us and interalia brought to our notice that there

is a delay of 17 days in preferring the instant appeal before this

Tribunal. There is a condonation of delay application on record

which is supported by an affidavit. It was contended that delay

occurred is due to technical reasons as downloading of

documents uploaded on ITAT e-filing portal was not taking place.

As advised by registry the documents were re-uploaded. Hence

Page 3 of 7

Kaushalya Agarwal Trust ITA No. 890/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2017-18 delay and that the same may please be condoned. Ld. DR

appearing for revenue has no objection if this tribunal desires to

condone the delay. Accordingly the delay is condoned as

sufficient cause is shown and appeal is admitted. It is

accordingly taken up for hearing.

3.2 The Ld. AR then brought to our notice that in the

“impugned order” the 1st appeal was dismissed only on ground

of delay in the filing of the 1st appeal by 120 days. It was

contended that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in dismissing the

1st appeal on ground of delay of 120 days as in fact there was no

delay. It was stated that the Ld. CIT(A) has calculated time from

18.10.2022 whereas “impugned rectification order” u/s 154

of the Act r.w.s. 143(1) though is dated 18.10.2022 but in the

Form No.35 in column No.2 the assessee has clearly stated that

date of “impugned rectification order” u/s 154 as 18.10.2022

but the date of service is as 21.01.2023. The date of filing of

the first appeal is 06.02.2023 which was well within the time

limit of 30 days. The Ld. CIT(A) has erroneously taken the date

of 18.10.2022 which was in fact the date of “impugned

rectification order” u/s 154 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to

Page 4 of 7

Kaushalya Agarwal Trust ITA No. 890/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2017-18 have taken into consideration the date of service which was

21.01.2023 as per Form 35. The Ld. CIT(A) therefore has erred

in law as time is required to be reckoned from date of service and

not from date of order. Hence “impugned order” should be set

aside. Per contra Ld. DR has not opposed the submissions of Ld.

AR. In fact Ld. DR concur with Ld. AR on delay aspect and has

stated that there was in fact no delay.

4.1 We now have to decide the legality, validity and the

proprietery of the “impugned order” basis records of the case

and rival contentions canvassed before us.

4.2 We have carefully perused the records of the case as

presented to this Tribunal by both Ld. AR & Ld. DR to determine

the legality, validity of the “impugned order” basis law and by

following due process .

4.3 We are of the considered opinion that the “impugned

order” is indeed erroneous and bad in law in as much as time

limit is reckoned from date of “impugned rectification order”

i.e. 18.10.2022 and not from date of service of order which date

was 21.01.2023. The time limit u/s 249(2)(c ) of the Act is to be

Page 5 of 7

Kaushalya Agarwal Trust ITA No. 890/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2017-18 reckoned from date of service and not from date of order. We

therefore hold that Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by dismissing the

1st appeal U/s 246A as time barred. We therefore set aside the

“impugned order”. Accordingly the matter is remand to Ld.

CIT(A) on denovo basis.

5.1 In the premises set out herein above, the “impugned

order” is set aside as and by way of remand back to the file of

Ld. CIT(A) on denovo basis.

5.2 In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

purpose.

Order pronounced in open court on 30.06.2025.

Sd/- Sd/-

(B.M. BIYANI) (PARESH M JOSHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Indore िदनांक / Dated : 30/06/2025 Dev/Sr. PS

Page 6 of 7

Kaushalya Agarwal Trust ITA No. 890/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2017-18 Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File

By order COPY Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore

Page 7 of 7