Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a Government Undertaking, failed to deduct TDS on payments for 'Paddy Procuring Commission'. The Assessing Officer initially passed an order under Section 201(1) for Rs. 2,36,43,317, then rectified it under Section 154, enhancing tax by Rs. 84,33,151. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) against the Section 154 order, but it was dismissed due to a delay of 1049 days.
Held
The Tribunal held that the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was not due to deliberate intention or gross negligence. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances, and the Supreme Court's direction to exclude periods during COVID-19, the Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to condone the delay of 1049 days and adjudicate the case on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay of 1049 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned, and the appeal should be adjudicated on merits.
Sections Cited
201(1), 154, 194H, 2(31), 2(7), 249(3), 249(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVISION” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE
आदेश /O R D E R
PER SHRI S. BALAKRISHNAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal centre,
I.T.A.No.29/VIZ/2025 Andhra Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited Delhi [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1071996850(1) dated 08.01.2025 for the A.Y.2019-20 arising out of order passed under section 154 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 02.12.2019.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee being a Government Undertaking owned by the Government of Andhra Pradesh for supply of essential commodities to public in general under Public Distribution System. It was noticed by the Ld. Assessing Officer [hereinafter in short “Ld. AO"] that the assessee has not deducted TDS on the payments made for “Paddy Procuring Commission for Velugu Centers” and “Paddy Procuring Commission for PAC Societies” and passed order U/s. 201(1) of the Act working out the TDS totaling to Rs. 2,36,43,317/-. Subsequently, the Ld. AO observed that a mistake apparent on record in the calculation of non-deduction of TDS for Paddy Procuring Commission and later passed a rectification order U/s. 154 of the Act dated 02/12/2019 by enhancing tax by Rs. 84,33,151/-. The Ld. AO issued a show cause notice requiring the assessee to file its objections on or before 27/11/2019. However, the assessee sought 30 days’ time vide letter dated 25/11/2019. The Ld. AO did not consider the submission of the assessee and proceeded to enhance the tax payable for Rs. 84,33,151/-. The order passed U/s. 154 of the Act was delivered to the assessee on 03/12/2019.
Page. No 2
I.T.A.No.29/VIZ/2025 Andhra Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited 3. On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) on 16/11/2022 against the order passed U/s. 154 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that there is a delay of 1049 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine.
On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us by raising the following grounds: - “1. The order of Ld.NFAC not condoning the delay in filing the appeal without considering the condonation petition and submissions with settled case laws confirming the order U/S. 154 is erroneous in law, contrary to facts and probabilities of the case and against the principles of equity, natural law and justice.
The Ld.NFAC not condoned the delay in filing of appeal as no sufficient cause has been shown U/s. 249(3) of the IT Act for failure of filing the appeal within in the limitation U/s.249(2) of the IT Act.
The Ld. NFAC failed to appreciate the petition for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal bearing explained sufficient cause for non filing of appeal within due date along with settled propositions that a liberal and pragmatic view has to be adopted in condonation of delay in the interests of natural justice when there no intentional delay in filing of appeal as held by Hon'ble Apex Court in [1987] 167 ITR 471 Collector, Land Acquisition vs MST. Katiji and Others, Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in [2013] 263 CTR (Kar) 549 CIT & Anr. Vs ISRO Satellite Centre and more recently by Hon'ble Jurisdictional ITAT in [2022] 217 TTJ (Hyd) 120 Srimaan Industries Private Limited vs ITO. It is further submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court in [2022] 441 ITR 722 (SC) Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re has held that the period from 15/03/2020 till 28/02/2022 to be excluded for purposes of limitation prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all Judicial or Quasi Judicial proceedings. Hence a period of 715 days (15/03/2020 to 28/02/2022) is to be excluded from the actual delay of 1049 days, thus the effective days for which condonation of delay is prayed is 334 days.
Page. No 3
I.T.A.No.29/VIZ/2025 Andhra Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited 4. The original appeal was heard by CIT(A) Hyderabad-11 on 25.05.2023 and orders not yet received. The only issue herein under consideration in deduct of TDS payment made towards procurement of paddy from Paddy Procurement Centers (PACS) wholly owned by Panchayat Department Govt. of AP which are part and parcel of the government and does not come under the definition of person U/s 2(31) or assessee u/s 2(7) of the Act and as such provisions of TDS U/s 194H are not applicable and therefore determining TDS u/s 194H is void-ab-intio.”
The only issue contested by the assessee is with respect to the cause that Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in filing the appeal with a delay of 1049 days. On this issue, Ld. Authorised Representative [hereinafter “Ld.AR”] submitted that the assessee received the order under section 201(1) & 201(1A) dated 31.01.2019. He further submitted that, the appeal within the stipulated time has been filed before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals), Hyderabad -11 and the appellate orders are yet to be received. In the meantime, the Ld.AO passed one more order under section 154 of the Act for rectifying the mistake apparent from record vide order dated 02.12.2019 which was served on the assessee on 03.12.2019. Ld.AR further submitted that appeal against the order under section 154 of the Act dated 02.12.2019 was filed on 16.11.2022 with a delay of 1049 days. He further submitted that as per the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the period covered under COVID is excluded and actual delay is only 334 days. He further submitted that petition for condonation of delay was filed before the Ld. CIT(A) but was not considered the same while dismissing the appeal. He therefore pleaded that since the Page. No 4
I.T.A.No.29/VIZ/2025 Andhra Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited original appeal was filed within the due date, the appeal filed against the order issued under section 154 of the Act with a delay of 1049 days shall be condoned and the Ld. CIT(A) may be directed to adjudicate the case on merits.
Per contra, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] relied on the orders of the Revenue Authorities.
We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessee has filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) against the original order passed under section 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act on 31.01.2019. However, as pleaded by the Ld.AR, assessee has inadvertently failed to file the appeal against order under section 154 of the Act on or before the due date i.e., 02.01.2020. Ld.AR plea is that the delay in filing the appeal is not with a deliberate intention or gross negligence and hence prayed for condonation. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, pending adjudication of the appeal filed under section 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A), we consider it deem fit to direct the Ld.CIT(A) to condone the delay of 1049 days and adjudicate the case on merits along with the original appeal. We therefore remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) and direct the assessee to cooperate in the remand proceedings
Page. No 5
I.T.A.No.29/VIZ/2025 Andhra Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited before the Ld. CIT(A) without seeking unnecessary adjournments. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are statistically allowed.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 03rd December, 2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (रिीश सूद) (एसबालाकृष्णन) (RAVISH SOOD) (S. BALAKRISHNAN) न्याधयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 03.12.2025 Giridhar, Sr.PS
आदेश की प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. निर्धाररती/ The Assessee : Andhra Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited 10-152/1, 4th Floor Sai Towers, Ashok Nagar Bandar Road, Kanuru – 520007 Andhra Pradesh 2. रधजस्व/ The Revenue : The Income Tax Officer (TDS)-Ward-1 Eluru – 534001 Andhra Pradesh 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 4. नवभधगीयप्रनतनिनर्, आयकरअपीलीयअनर्करण, नवशधखधपटणम /DR,ITAT, Visakhapatnam 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax गधर्ाफ़धईल / Guard file 6. आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER
Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam
Page. No 6