KINSHIP SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. ACIT (TDS), ERNAKULAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 772/COCH/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 November 2025AY 2007-08Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

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?

Section 201,Section 254

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

For Appellant: Shri Paulson, CA
For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 06.11.2025Pronounced: 07.11.2025

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").

2.

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.

3.

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.

4.

Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the order of the ld. CIT(A).

5.

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

All 1,566 judgments and leading authorities on Section 201 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →