FREQUENT STOCK AND SHARES PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(3), INDORE, INDORE
Facts
Two assessees, Motika Finance Limited and Frequent Stock and Shares Private Limited, filed multiple appeals with significant delays (506, 324/140 days). They argued that their companies were non-operational and notices/orders were not physically served, leading to delays in prosecuting first appeals and filing ITAT appeals. They sought condonation of delay and a remand of their cases to lower authorities.
Held
The Tribunal found 'sufficient cause' for the delays under Section 253(5), citing the principle of substantial justice from *Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji*. It condoned the delays and remanded all appeals to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, subject to a cost of Rs. 5,000/- per case payable to the Prime Minister National Relief Fund.
Key Issues
Whether the significant delays in filing appeals by the assessee companies should be condoned, and if the cases should be remanded to the lower authorities for fresh adjudication due to non-receipt of notices and non-operation of the entities.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 143(3), 144, 250(6), 253(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per Bench:
The captioned appeals are filed by two different assessees, the details are as under:
Page 1 of 6
Motika Finance Ltd. & Frequent Stock and shares Private Limited ITA Nos.75, 77 & 76/Ind/2025 & ITA No.78, 79 & 80/Ind/2025 - AYs: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14
ITA No. A.Y. Impugned order Original proceedings
Motika Finance Limited
1 75/Ind/2025 2011-12 Order of first-appeal Assessment-order dated dated 20.06.2023 passed 30.12.2018 passed by by CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi ACIT-3(1), Indore u/s 148 r.w.s. 143(3) 2 77/Ind/2025 2012-13 Order of first-appeal Assessment-order dated dated 20.06.2023 passed 31.12.2018 passed by by CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi ACIT-3(1), Indore u/s 148 r.w.s. 143(3) 3 76/Ind/2025 2013-14 Order of first-appeal Assessment-order dated dated 20.06.2023 passed 31.12.2018 passed by by CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi ACIT-3(1), Indore u/s 148 r.w.s. 143(3) Frequent Stock and Shares Private Limited
4 79/Ind/2025 2011-12 Order of first-appeal Assessment-order dated dated 28.12.2023 passed 29.12.2018 passed by by CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi ITO-1(3), Indore u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) 5 80/Ind/2025 2012-13 Order of first-appeal Assessment-order dated dated 06.06.2024 passed 26.12.2019 passed by by CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi ITO-1(1), Indore u/s 144 r.w.s.147 6 78/Ind/2025 2013-14 Order of first-appeal Assessment-order dated dated 06.06.2024 passed 11.12.2019 passed by by CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi ITO-1(1), Indore u/s 144 r.w.s.147
Since these appeals involve identical/similar issues for adjudication,
they were heard together at the request of parties and are being disposed of
by this single order for the sake of convenience, brevity and clarity.
The registry has informed that there is a delay of 506 days in all three
appeals filed by assessee “Motika Finance Limited” and delay of 324 / 140
days in the appeals filed by assessee “Frequent Stock and Shares Private
Limited”. Ld. AR for assessees submitted that the assessees have filed
respective applications for condonation of delays supported by affidavits on
stamp. Referring to contents of same, Ld. AR submitted that both of the
Page 2 of 6
Motika Finance Ltd. & Frequent Stock and shares Private Limited ITA Nos.75, 77 & 76/Ind/2025 & ITA No.78, 79 & 80/Ind/2025 - AYs: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14
assessee-companies were non-operational and neither the notices of
hearings nor the impugned orders were physically served upon their
registered addresses. Referring to Para 4 of the impugned order passed in
first appeal being ITA No. 75/Ind/2025, Ld. AR showed that the CIT(A) has
issued notices of hearing by way of uploading on ITBA portal. Ld. AR
submitted that since the notices of hearings and the impugned orders did
not reach to assessee-companies which were non-operational, neither the
first-appeals could be prosecuted before CIT(A) nor the present appeals
before ITAT could be filed in time. Ld. AR prayed that having regard to the
fact that the assessee-companies have become non-operational and in the
interest of justice, a judicious view may be taken and the delays in filing
these appeals may be condoned.
Ld. AR next submitted that the CIT(A) has merely upheld AO’s orders
but the appeals of assessee require an apt adjudication in terms of section
250(6). Ld. AR went ahead to submit that the Assessing Officers have made
high pitched additions on account of unexplained investments in shares,
disallowance of losses, etc. whereas the relevant transactions were already
recorded in the books of assessee-companies and no additions were
warranted. Ld. AR submitted that these cases are quite meritorious and
require a fair adjudication for proper taxation in terms of provisions of
Income-tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a prayer is made to remand these matters
to lower authorities. Ld. AR proposed that the cases where the AO has
Page 3 of 6
Motika Finance Ltd. & Frequent Stock and shares Private Limited ITA Nos.75, 77 & 76/Ind/2025 & ITA No.78, 79 & 80/Ind/2025 - AYs: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14
passed assessment-orders u/s 143(3) may be remanded to CIT(A) and the
cases where the AO has passed ex-parte assessment orders u/s 144 may be
remanded to AO.
Ld. DR for revenue realising the fact that the assessee-companies are
non-operational, did not object to condonation of delays in these appeals. He,
however, requested that a suitable cost must be imposed upon assessee-
companies. Ld. AR further proposed that since the issues are more or less
identical in all appeals, it would be better to restore all these cases at the
level of AO.
We have considered the explanation advanced by assessees in the
solemnized affidavits and in absence of any contrary fact or material on
record, the assessee is found to have a “sufficient cause” for delay in filing
present appeals as narrated above. We find that section 253(5) of the Act
empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if
there is a “sufficient cause” for not presenting appeal within prescribed time.
It is also a settled position by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land
Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387
that whenever substantial justice and technical considerations are opposed
to each other, the cause of substantial justice must be preferred by adopting
a justice-oriented approach.
Page 4 of 6
Motika Finance Ltd. & Frequent Stock and shares Private Limited ITA Nos.75, 77 & 76/Ind/2025 & ITA No.78, 79 & 80/Ind/2025 - AYs: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14
We, however, find merit in the proposal/submission made by Ld. DR
for revenue for imposition of cost upon assessees and also to remand all
these matters to the file of AO. Accordingly, we condone the delays and
remand these matters to the file of AO subject to a cost of Rs. 5,000/- in
each case to be paid by assessee to “Prime Minister National Relief Fund”
and submission of proof by assessee to AO. Needless to mention that the AO
shall give necessary opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass appropriate
orders. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings
as may be fixed by AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing
which the AO shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders in accordance
with law. Ordered accordingly.
Resultantly, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open court on 30/06/2025 immediately after conclusion of hearing and subsequently reduced in writing.
Sd/- Sd/- (PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Indore
िदनांक/ Dated : 30/06/2025
Patel/Sr. PS
Page 5 of 6
Motika Finance Ltd. & Frequent Stock and shares Private Limited ITA Nos.75, 77 & 76/Ind/2025 & ITA No.78, 79 & 80/Ind/2025 - AYs: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14
Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYSr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Page 6 of 6
