METROCITY HOMES,DHARAMPETH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRLCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO & SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER
PER K.M. ROY, A.M.
This appeal by the assessee is against the impugned order dated
31/03/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–3,
Nagpur, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2018–19. 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:–
“1. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Nagpur erred in confirming the addition of Rs.16,00,000/- by dismissing the ground of appeal by issuing a corrigendum, which was allowed in the Original Appellate Order.
The corrigendum to Appellate Order issued on 09/05/2023 and 21/07/2023 are illegal, invalid and bad in law.
The notice of Demand under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Rs. 20,78,665/- issued by the Assessing Officer on 07/05/2023 i.e, before the issue of corrigendum is illegal, invalid and bad in law.
Any other ground shall be prayed at the time of hearing.”
Metrocity Homes
At the very outset, the Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 08 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee. Such delay is supported by a duly sworn affidavit, which is placed on record by the learned Counsel, Shri Dugarkar, appearing for the assessee. The contents of the Affidavit is reproduced below:–
“I, Kailas Kejgir, do hereby take oath and state of solemn affirmation as under:
I, Kailas Kejgir, Chartered Accountant look after the Income Tax cases of M/s. Metrocity Homes. The appeal for the A.Y. 2018-19 was e-filed with the Hon-ble ITAT, Nagpur against the order of the Hon'ble CIT(A) in the case of assessee within due date but the same was not considered at the time of physical submission with