AMIN THARANI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-24(1)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 905/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 June 2024AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON'BLE (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding reasonable and sufficient cause. The Tribunal held that the Ld. CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits rather than dismissing it ex-parte.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 07.08.2023, which dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte. The appeal was filed with a delay of 147 days.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits of the case? Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

IT Act

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HONBLE & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HONBLEShri Ajay R. Singh & Shri Akshay Pawar Shri Harmesh Lal

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. Singh &, Shri Akshay Pawar
For Respondent: Shri Harmesh Lal
Pronounced: 05.06.2024

O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (AM)

1.

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 07.08.2023 by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter in short “Ld. CIT(A)”] pertaining to A.Y.2018-19.

(A.Y: 2018-19) AMIN THARANI 2. The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal exparte thereby confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer.

3.

The appeal is barred by limitation by 147 days. The assessee has filed a letter requesting condonation of delay supported by an affidavit. We have carefully perused the contents of the affidavit and are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause in not filing the appeal before the period of limitation. The delay is condoned.

4.

We have carefully perused the order of the Ld. CIT(A). We are of the considered view that even if the assessee has not responded to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have dismissed the appeal on merits of the case and not in limine. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it fit to restore the appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh considering the merits of the case and after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to attend the Appellate Proceedings,

Page No. 2

(A.Y: 2018-19) AMIN THARANI update his E-Mail ID and is further directed not to seek any adjournments.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 05th June, 2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →