What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to condone the remaining 9-day delay and decide the appeal on its merits. The CIT(A) was instructed to pass a speaking order after providing the assessee an opportunity to be heard.

The assessee, a cooperative bank, filed its return of income. The Assessing Officer made significant additions, increasing the total income substantially. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to an 11-day delay, with only 2 days condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on account of a short delay without proper consideration, and whether the appeal should be decided on merits.

Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank… vs ACIT | ITAT Raipur 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Doshi, CA, Shri R. K. Singh, DR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.149/RPR/2018 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank ACIT, Circle- 3(1), Maryadit, Raipur (CG). Opp. Lal Ganga Shopping Mall, Vs. G.E. Road, Raipur (CG).

PAN : AAAAJ2713L (Appellant) (Respondent)

: Assessee by Shri R.B. Doshi, CA : Shri R. K. Singh, DR Department by Date of hearing : 09-08-2018 Date of pronouncement : 09-08-2018 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 04.06.2018 of the ld. CIT(A)- 1, Raipur (CG) relating to assessment year 2012-13. 2. The ld. counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that the assessee is a cooperative bank and filed its return of income on 31.03.2013 declaring total income of Rs.10,29,000/-. The Assessing Officer, in the order passed u/s 143(3) on 09.03.2015, completed the assessment determining the total income at

2 ITA No.149/RPR/2018

Rs.17,21,65,866/-. He submitted that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed

by the assessee on account of delay in filing of the appeal by 11 days. He

submitted that the ld. CIT(A) condoned the delay for 2 days and dismissed the

appeal for not explaining the remaining 9 days. He submitted that in the interest

of justice the ld. CIT(A) should be directed to condone the delay and decide the

issue on merit by passing a speaking order.

The ld. DR opposed the arguments as advanced by the assessee.

After hearing both the sides, we find the ld. CIT(A) did not condone the

delay of 9 days out of the total delay of 11 days in filing of the appeal by the

assessee. Further, although he has decided the appeal on merit but it is a very

cryptic one without giving reasons as to how the additions made by the

Assessing Officer can be sustained. Considering the totality of the facts of the

case and in the interest of justice, we direct the ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay

in filing of the appeal filed by the assessee and decide the issue on merit by

passing a speaking order. Needless to say, the ld. CIT(A) shall decide the issue

as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are

accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

3 ITA No.149/RPR/2018

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court at the time of hearing itself i.e. on this 09th August, 2018.

Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 09-08-2018. Sujeet Copy of order to: - 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT 4) The CIT(A) 5) The DR, I.T.A.T., Raipur. By Order //True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Raipur

JILA SAHAKARI KENDRIYA BANK MARYADIT,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1), RAIPUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments