KINSHIP SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. ACIT (TDS), ERNAKULAM
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that there was a reasonable cause for the belated filing of the appeal. Therefore, the case was remanded back to the CIT(A) to condone the delay and hear the appeal on its merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against an assessment order, but it was dismissed due to a delay of 895 days in filing. The assessee challenged this dismissal, citing reasons for the delay.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) can be condoned and if the appeal should be heard on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
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 MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), ADDL/JCIT-4, Bengaluru [hereinafter the “Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 14.08.2025for the Assessment Year 2007-08 (hereinafter the "AY").
Assessee challenged the assessment order passed u/s 201 r.w.s 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act') before the ld. CIT(A). However, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine as there was delay of 895 days in filing the appeal. Simultaneously, the ld.CIT(A) also dismissed the appeal of the assessee on merits.
The ld.AR of the assessee has pointed out the reasons for delay in filing appeal before the CIT(A), which is narrated at para 2.1 of the ld.CIT(A)order and pleaded for condonation of delay.
Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the order of the ld. CIT(A).
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record of the appeal files. We are of the considered view that there was reasonable cause for filing the appeal belatedly. Hence, we remand back appeal file to the ld. CIT(A) and direct the ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay in filing the appeal and hear the appeal on merits. It is settled position of law that once appeal is time barred then going into the merits of the case is uncalled for. Needless to say, the ld. CIT(A) before adjudicating the appeal, will provide proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to explain and argue the grounds raised
in the appeal. Assessee is also directed to co-operate before the CIT(A).
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes.
More judgments on Section 201
- Sbi, (Erstwhile Sbbj), Baran vs ITO (TDS), KotaITA 143/JPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Santosh Kumar Bhogi, Visakhapatnam vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 253/VIZ/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Raj Construction, Vadodara vs The ITO, Ward TDS-2, VadodaraITA 327/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Himanshusinhji Jyotendrasinhji Jadeja… vs DCIT/ACIT Circle-1(1), RKT, RajkotITA 325/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Jagadish Panchal, Udaipur vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 314/JODH/2024[2016-17]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026