Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA
O R D E R
PER SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, AM:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short ‘the CIT(A)’), dated 26.07.2024 for the Assessment Year 2018-19.
The brief facts of the case are that the return of income was filed by the assessee showing loss of Rs.2,67,04,742/-. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under e-assessment scheme. In the course of assessment, the AO disallowed interest payment of Rs.44,94,436/- in respect of loans utilized for investment in shares and the assessment was completed under Section 143(3)
India Hospitality Ltd. vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2018-19 - 2 – of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) on 31.03.2021 at loss of Rs.2,22,10,306/-.
Aggrieved with the order of the AO, the assessee had filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority, which was decided vide the impugned order and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed.
Now, the assessee is in second appeal before us. The following grounds have been taken by the assessee in this appeal:
“1. The learned CIT-(A), NFAC, DELHI, has erred in law and on facts in holding the appeal filed as delayed and inadmissible, disregarding the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in order dt.10-01-2022, and in dismissing the appeal on that ground.
2. The Id. CIT (A) has further erred in dismissing the appeal on 26-07-2024 even after noticing the fact that adjournment application was filed on 16- 07- 2024 requesting for time up to 31-07-2024, and without informing the appellant that the request for adjournment was not granted.
3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT (A) ought not to have treated the appeal as delayed and inadmissible, ought not to have dismissed it as such and ought to have decided the appeal on merits.
4. It is therefore prayed that the order of the CIT (A) - may be quashed and set aside and the appeal may be restored for adjudication on merits, and costs of appeal may be determined/awarded.”
Shri K. C. Thaker, the Ld. AR appearing for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal by holding that there was delay of more than 8 months in filing of the appeal, which was not condoned by him. He further submitted that in the course of appeal proceeding, the assessee had sought adjournment on the last date of hearing on 16.07.2024, but the appeal of the assessee was dismissed on this technical ground India Hospitality Ltd. vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2018-19 - 3 – without considering the adjournment application and also without allowing any opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Ld. AR further submitted that the order of the AO was received during Covid pandemic period and Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, reported in (2022) 441 ITR 722 (SC) had excluded the time period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 of the Covid-19 pandemic for all limitation purpose. Considering this binding direction of Hon’ble Supreme Court, there was no delay in filing of the present appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) should not have dismissed the appeal on mere technical without considering the merits of the case. The Ld. AR, therefore, requested that the matter may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the matter afresh on merits of the case.
Per contra, Shri B. P. Srivastava, Ld. Sr. DR had no objection if the matter was set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).
We have considered the facts of the case and the submission of Ld. AR. Assessment order in this case was passed on 31.03.2021, which was during Covid pandemic period. The appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was filed by the assessee on 17.12.2021. Hon’ble Apex Court in the decision of Cognizance for Extension of Limitation (supra) had directed the exclusion of time period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 of the Covid-19 pandemic for all limitation purpose. In view of this fact, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in refusing to condone the impugned delay in filing of appeal, is not found sustainable in the eyes of law. The assessee’s present appeal is, therefore, restored back to India Hospitality Ltd. vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2018-19 - 4 – the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for afresh appropriate adjudication. The assessee should be allowed a proper opportunity of being heard by the Ld. CIT(A).
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
This Order pronounced on 06/01/2025
Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 06/01/2025 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 5. 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,