A. B. FURNISHING PRIVATE LIMITED,HOOGHLY vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 23(2), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1884/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 March 2019AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the 53-day delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) in the interest of justice. The case was restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a 53-day delay without condonation. The CIT(A) held that the assessee failed to provide supporting medical documentation for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without condoning the delay and affording the assessee an opportunity to produce supporting documentation.

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, “SMC” BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Shri S.S. Godara, JM]

Hearing: 04.03.2019Pronounced: 22.03.2019

For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri C.J. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 04.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019 ORDER

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15 is directed against the CIT(A)-6, Kolkata’s order dated 19.06.2018 passed in case no. CIT(A), Kol-6/10554/2016-17 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short the ‘Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges at the outset that the CIT(A)’s order has dismissed the assessee’s appeal without condoning the delay in question of 53 days. He holds in Para 3 of his order under challenge that the assessee’s counsel failed to produce any supporting medical documentation in support of delay condonation. There is no indication forthcoming from lower appellate discussion as to whether the assessee had been granted sufficient opportunity to file the necessary medical certificate or not. Be that as it may, I am of the view that larger interest of justice would be served in case the CIT(A) proceeds to adjudicate the assessee’s appeal on merits. I accordingly condone the impugned delay

A.B. Furnishing Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr. 2014-15 of 53 days’ in filing and restore the entire issue back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits within three effective opportunities of hearing.

3.

This assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court on 22.03.2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →