Loading judgment…
Facts
The appellant, a temple, did not file its Income Tax Return for AY 2013-14. Based on cash deposits of Rs. 97,83,772/-, the AO initiated reassessment under Section 148 and, due to non-compliance, made a best judgment assessment adding Rs. 61,89,177/- as unexplained money. The CIT(A) dismissed the appellant's appeal *in limine* on the ground of a 115-day delay, deeming the reasons for delay casual and unacceptable.
Held
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that the CIT(A)'s dismissal of the appeal due to delay, without properly considering the detailed explanation provided for the delay, was legally untenable. The ITAT remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh disposal on merits, after providing the appellant a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal *in limine* on grounds of delay without considering the reasons for such delay.
Sections Cited
139(1), 148, 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM
O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) dated 11.08.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14.
Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is running a temple. No regular return of income under the provisions of section 13891) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed by the appellant for the assessment year under consideration. Based on the information that the appellant made cash deposits in the bank Sree Pazhanchira Devi Temple Trust account aggregating to Rs. 97,83,772/- the AO formed an opinion that income escaped assessment to tax. Accordingly, issued a notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 29.03.2021. The appellant neither complied with the notice u/s. 148 nor the notices issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act. In the circumstance, the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter called "the AO") was constrained to pass best judgement assessment treating the cash deposits as unexplained money of the trust. Accordingly made addition of Rs. 61,89,177/-.
Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) with a delay of 115 days. The CIT(A) had refused to condone the delay by holding that the reasons given for the delay were found to be very casual and unacceptable. Accordingly, he dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground of delay.
Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. At the outset, we find that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground of delay. Admittedly, there is a delay of 115 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The appellant had filed a detailed explanation giving the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), which is extracted by the CIT(A) at para 3.1 of the impugned order. The CIT(A), without dealing with the reasons given for the delay, had simply Sree Pazhanchira Devi Temple Trust dismissed the appeal on the ground of delay, which is untenable in the eyes of law. Therefore the matter is restored back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh disposal in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 19th November, 2025.