DR. VIVEK G. BHARTU,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 8(3)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1868/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 June 2017AY 2003-043 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding it to be small and considering the interest of justice. The appeals were remitted back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals before the CIT(A) with a delay ranging from 96 to 108 days. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeals without considering the merits due to this delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) should be condoned and the appeals considered on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 254

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA

For Appellant: Shri. Dr. Vivek Bhartu
For Respondent: Shri. Sumit Kumar

Date of Hearing – 01.06.2017 Date of Order -01.06.2017

O R D E R PER: SHAMIM YAHYA These are appeals by the assessee against respective orders of learned CIT-A for the concerned assessment years.

2.

At the outset assessee is aggrieved that the learned CIT-A has not condoned the delay ranging from 96 days to 108 days in filing the appeal and has hence dismissed the appeal without considering the merits.

3.

I find that assessee has submitted before the learned CIT-A

1873/Mum/2017 Dr. Vivek G. Bhartu that he was advised by the counsel not to file appeal against the order of the assessing officer passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the I.T Act.

4.

Later on after proper advice the assessee filed the appeals which resulted in a delay of approximately 3 months. Learned CIT-A had not condoned the delay considering that the reason attributed for the delay are too general.

5.

Upon hearing the learned departmental representative and perusing the records I find that as expounded by the honourable apex court a distinction has to be made between a small delay and inordinate delay. Consideration of substantial interest of justice has also to be taken into account. Considering the present case on the prism of aforesaid expositions in my considered opinion the small delay in filing appeals before the learned CIT-A deserved to be condoned, on the facts and circumstances explained for the delay. Accordingly in the interest of justice I condone the delay and remit the issue raised on merits of the file of learned CIT-A. Learned CIT-A shall consider the issues raised on merits and pass speaking order after giving the assessee proper opportunity of being heard.

1873/Mum/2017 Dr. Vivek G. Bhartu

6.

In the result these appeals by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 01.06.2017

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →