HASANAMBA FUEL PARK,HASSAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, HASSAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3162/BANG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 December 2018AY 2014-154 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 held that since the defect was rectified by producing the notice of demand, the appeal should be treated as properly filed. The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal on merits after affording an opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed as defective for not furnishing the notice of demand under section 156 along with the appeal memorandum. The reason cited for non-submission was the illness and death of the Managing Partner's parents.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal dismissed for a curable defect can be restored to file if the defect is subsequently rectified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 156

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH ‘C’ SMC

Before: SHRI N.V VASUDEVAN

For Appellant: Shri K.M Shivayogi Swamy, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Karuppaswamy S.R, Addl. CIT
Hearing: 17.12.2018Pronounced: 21.12.2018

PER SHRI N.V VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT :

1.

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 20/9/2018 of CIT(A), Mysuru relating to asst. year 2014-15.

2.

The assessee was aggrieved by the order of assessment dated 22/12/2016 passed u/s 144 of the Act and he filed an appeal challenging the additions made to the total income made in the said order of assessment. The assessee could not produce the original notice of demand before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee as defective for non furnishing of notice of demand u/s 156 of the Act along with the memorandum of appeal.

3.

Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

The learned counsel for the Assessee submitted before me that the reasons for non submission of notice of demand u/s 156 of the Act was because of the fact that parents of the Managing Partner fell ill and subsequently died and this was the reason why the notice of demand could not be traced and filed along with the memorandum of appeal before the CIT(A). Copy of the notice of demand of has also filed before me and also original produced before me for perusal.

5.

I am of the view that since the defect for which the appeal was dismissed as un-admitted has been rectified, it would be just an appropriate to direct the CIT(A) to treat the appeal filed by the assessee is in proper form and decide the various grounds raised by the appeal on merits in accordance with law after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I hold and direct accordingly.

6.

In the result, appeal by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21st December, 2018.

More judgments on Section 156

All 694 judgments and leading authorities on Section 156 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →