SHREE BADSHAH YADAV CHARITABLE TRUST,MAINPURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(5), MAINPURI

PDF · subscribers

ITA 573/AGR/2024Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 April 2025AY 2017-18Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)2 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 set aside the CIT(A)'s order, condoned the delay, and restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication. The assessee was granted an opportunity to substantiate its case on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a delay of 83 days in filing the appeal. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs. 37 Lacs on account of cash deposits for which no satisfactory explanation was provided.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned to allow the assessee an opportunity to present its case on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AGRA

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

Pronounced: 22.04.2025

(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year:2017-18) Shree Badshah Yadav Income-tax Officer, Charitable Trust Ward 4(2)(5), Mainpuri. बनाम/ Campus S.K. Scientific Public Vs. Inter College Karhal, Mainpuri(UP). �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAOTS-3631-B (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Anurag Sinha, Adv. – Ld. AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [CIT(A)] on 15-11-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 of the Act on 28-10-2019. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of cash deposit for Rs.37 Lacs for want of any satisfactory explanation from the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) did not admit the appeal for want of condonation of delay of 83 days. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR has stated that the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case on merits and accordingly, prayed for another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities which has which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice and considering the possibility of communication gaps during faceless regime, we deem it fit to afford another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its case on merits before Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the delay in first appeal stand condoned. The appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →