CHHAYA MASURKAR,BALAGHAT vs. NFAC, ITO BALAGHAT, BALAGHAT

ITA 61/JAB/2024Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur26 August 2025AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The appeal has become infructuous due to the settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The assessee had also raised grounds regarding the rejection of the condonation of delay application by the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) who confirmed additions of Rs. 26,49,500/- and Rs. 2,00,500/-. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal by not condoning the delay in filing. Subsequently, the assessee opted to settle the appeal under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in not allowing the condonation of delay application and whether the penalty imposed was bad in law.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 50C,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH “SMC”, JABALPUR

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Bagrecha, CA

(A) The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)- Delhi, dated 23.02.2024 for the assessment year 2013-14. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under: -

“1. On the facts & circumstances of the case LD CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the condonation of delay application in spite of having reasonable case as submitted by assessee henceforth the order of CIT(A) may kindly be quashed.

2.

On the facts & circumstances of the case LD CIT(A) has erred in not deciding the issue on merit & simply rejecting the appeal by disallowing condonation of filling appeal application. ., The order passed by Ld. CIT (A) NFAC under section 250

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.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →