M/S KVR INFRA,MUMBAI vs. JCIT, RANGE-30(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2195/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 August 2024AY 2013-144 pages
AI SummaryN/A

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the 80-day delay and the incorrect information in Form No. 35, validating the CIT(A)'s initial dismissal. However, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A), directing the assessee to submit a proper application for condonation of delay by resubmitting Form No. 35. The CIT(A) is to then consider the condonation application and, if satisfied about sufficient cause, decide the appeal on its merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a partnership firm, filed its return of income for A.Y. 2013-14 which was picked for scrutiny, leading to an assessment order on 18.03.2016 determining total income at Rs. 6.41 Crores. The assessee challenged this assessment before the CIT(A), but while filing Form No. 35, it incorrectly stated there was no delay, although the appeal was filed 80 days late. Consequently, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for statistical purposes without admitting it, as no application for condonation of delay was made.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for statistical purposes due to a procedural defect (non-disclosure of delay and lack of condonation application) and whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to seek condonation of delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 143(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JM

PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM:

1.

This appeal is filed by the M/s KVR INFRA (the assessee) against the appellate order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for A.Y. 2013-14 dated 15.03.2024 wherein the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 08.03.2016 by the Joint ITA No.2195/M/2024 AY: 2013-14 M/s KVR Infra Versus JCIT, Mumbai Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-30(2), Mumbai (the learned AO) was dismissed for statistical purposes.

2.

The reason being that the appeal was filed late by 80 d

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →