3K TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD 2-(2), HYDERABAD

ITA 62/HYD/2022Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 March 2026AY 2011-1210 pages

AI SummaryN/A

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the assessee's explanation for the 2111-day delay to be unsubstantiated and contradictory, considering it an 'eyewash'. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the Tribunal emphasized that inordinate delay without a justifiable and bona fide cause cannot be condoned, as limitation provisions ensure certainty and prevent stale claims. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed solely on the ground of limitation.

What were the facts?

The assessee, 3K Technologies Limited, engaged in software export, filed its AY 2010-11 return at Nil. The AO, during scrutiny under section 143(2), disallowed the claim for exemption under section 10AA of the Act, rejected software expense deductions, and estimated income at 22% of gross receipts under section 143(3) due to the assessee's failure to furnish information. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's order. The assessee then filed an appeal before the ITAT, which was delayed by 2111 days, attributed to the misplacement of the CIT(A) order by a staff member and the Managing Director's unawareness.

What were the issues?

Whether the inordinate delay of 2111 days in filing the appeal before the ITAT should be condoned, given the assessee's explanation of a misplaced order and an MD out of station, and contradictory affidavits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad

Before: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CA राजस्व द्वारा /

For Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

PER. RAVISH SOOD, J.M: The present appeal filed by the assessee company is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 2, Hyderabad, dated 28/03/2016, which in turn arises from the order passed by the Assessing Officer (for short, “AO”) under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”), dated 30/03/2014 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11. The assessee company has assailed the impugned order of the CIT(A) on the following grounds of appeal:

"1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

11.12.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

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 account Sign 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →