LAILA AGENCIES,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ITO, WARD 2, , THIRUVALLA

ITA 1048/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 June 2025AY 2017-18Bench: the CIT(A) with a delay of 5 month. The appellant had filed explanation before the CIT(A) stating that the delay had occurred on account of dispute with the previous counsel without substantiating the same. The CIT(A), however, dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay.4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted a further 236-day delay in filing the appeal to ITAT and found the appellant's explanation for the delay (firm out of business, unawareness of order) to be not bona fide and unsupported by evidence. Citing a Supreme Court judgment on 'delay and laches', the Tribunal dismissed the appeal.

What were the facts?

Laila Agencies, a partnership firm, did not file its income tax return for AY 2017-18. The AO initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 148, leading to a best judgment assessment and an addition of Rs. 1.07 crore for unexplained cash deposits due to non-compliance. An appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a 5-month delay, which was not condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay of 236 days in filing the appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal could be condoned given the explanation provided by the appellant.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 148,Section 142(1)(ii),Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM & SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JM

For Appellant: Ms. Krishna K., Advocate
For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 21.05.2025Pronounced: 27.06.2025

Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 26.02.2024 for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. The appellant is a partnership firm engaged in the business of dealing in stationery items. No regular return of income for AY 2017- 18 under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed by the appellant. The AO formed an opinion that income escaped assessment to tax. Accordingly, notice u/s. 148 of the 2 Laila Agencies Act was issued on 29.03.2021. The appellant neither complied with the notices u/s. 148 nor notice u/s. 142(1)(ii) of the Act, which were issued by the AO. In the circumstances, the AO proc

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →