Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a partnership firm, failed to file its income tax return for AY 2011-12. The case was reopened under section 147 based on information about a contractual receipt of Rs. 7,056,638 not recorded in accounts. Despite notices, the assessee did not comply, leading the AO to add the amount and assess total income at Rs. 7,216,638.
Held
The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal as inadmissible due to a 33-day delay and the absence of a condonation of delay application. The Tribunal noted the assessee's representative's submission for an opportunity to file the condonation application and decided to restore the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal dismissed by CIT(A) on grounds of delay and absence of condonation application should be restored to allow the assessee to present their case on merits.
Sections Cited
144, 147, 151, 194C, 69A, 249(2), 250, 246A, 142(1), 133(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI
PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM:
ITA number 4110/M/2023 is filed by M/s Palak Enterprises (the assessee/appellant) for assessment year 2011 – 12 against appellate order passed by the National faceless appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (the learned CIT – A) dated 17/9/2023 wherein the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order passed under section 144 of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 30/11/2018 passed by The Income Tax Officer Ward – 27 (2) (5), Mumbai (The AO) was
Order pronounced in the open court on 23.04.2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Mumbai, Dated: 23.04.2024 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to : The Appellant 1. The Respondent 2. CIT 3. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 4. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai