CHERRY JAIN FAMILY TRUST ,ASHOKNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CPC BENGALURU
Facts
The assessee preferred an appeal against an order that dismissed their appeal as barred by limitation. The first appeal was filed before the CIT(Appeals) with a delay of 2176 days. The assessee claimed they were unaware of the demand as no intimation was served.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged the significant delay but took judicial notice of the COVID-19 pandemic period, which was also considered by the Supreme Court for extension of limitation. Therefore, a substantial part of the delay was condoned. The remaining delay was conditionally condoned subject to payment of Rs. 5000/- to the Prime Minister's National Relief Fund.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the first appeal before the CIT(Appeals) should be condoned, considering the circumstances including the COVID-19 pandemic.
Sections Cited
250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, 143(1) of the Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 35/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17
Cherry Jain Family Trust, Vs. Income-tax Officer(Exemption), Ward No. 18, Subhash Ganj, Ashoknagar (Gwalior). Ashoknagar- 473331 (MP). PAN : AABTC8789K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Subhash Jain, C.A. Department by Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of hearing 19.05.2025 Date of pronouncement 29.05.2025
ORDER Per Sunil Kumar Singh, Judicial Member: This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 24.12.2024 (wrongly mentioned as 11.01.2025 in Form-36) passed in Appeal No. ADDL/JCIT(A)-1 DELHI/10002/2015-16
by the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), wherein the learned first appellate authority dismissed assessee’s appeal as barred by limitation.
At the very outset, it is submitted by learned AR of the assessee that the first appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(Appeals) on 04.11.2023
ITA No.35/Agr/2025
against the order dated 19.10.2017 passed u/s. 143(1) of the Act by a
delay of 2176 days. Learned AR submitted that the appellant trust was in
dark about any demand because no intimation u/s. 143(1) was ever
served upon the appellant. The appeal could accordingly be filed on
04.11.2023 after downloading the intimation dated 19.10.2017 by the
new consultant on 26.10.2023. An affidavit on behalf of Shri Mahavir
Chaudhary, Advocate has also been submitted in support of the delay
condonation application. Prayed to condone the delay caused in filing
the first appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and afford an opportunity to
make submissions before the ld. CIT(Appeals) for deciding the
appellant’s cause on merits.
Learned DR has supported the impugned order.
It is true that there is huge delay of 2176 days in filing the first
appeal before ld. CIT(Appeals). We, however, take judicial notice of the
fact that most of the duration of delay caused in filing appeal before this
tribunal overlaps the period of spread of global pandemic COVID-19.
This fact has also been taken care of by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Misc.
app. No. 21/2022 in Misc. app No. 665/2021 in suo-moto W.P(c) No.
3/2020 in civil original jurisdiction and in re cognizance of extension of
limitation with miscellaneous application No. 29/2022, in miscellaneous
application No. 655/2021 in suo-moto petition(c) no. 03/2020 and vide 2 | P a g e
ITA No.35/Agr/2025
para 5(1) of its order dated 10.01.2022 directed that its order dated
23.03.2020 is restored and in continuation of the subsequent order
dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021, it is directed that the
period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the
purpose of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special
laws in respect of all judicial or quasi judicial proceedings after exclusion
of the aforesaid duration. Therefore, substantial part of the delay in filing
the first appeal before ld. CIT(Appeals) gets condoned in view of the
Hon’ble Apex Court directions.
As far as the delay of remaining period is concerned, keeping in
view the un-rebutted corroborating facts mentioned in the affidavit
submitted on behalf of the assessee, we conditionally condone the delay
of remaining period subject to the payment of cost of Rs.5000/- to be
deposited by the appellant in Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund
within one month from the date of this order. The appellant shall furnish
the receipt of such deposit before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Learned
CIT(Appeals) is directed to decide the assessee’s first appeal on merits
on receipt of cost deposit proof as noted hereinabove. Needless to say
that Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall ensure substantial compliance of the
principles of natural justice.
3 | P a g e
ITA No.35/Agr/2025
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Impugned order dt. 24.12.2024 is set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29.05.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.05.2025 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra
4 | P a g e
