NASEEM ISHRAT,JHANSI vs. ITO.WARD 2(3)(5), JHANSI,UP

PDF · subscribers
ITA 69/AGR/2024Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 April 2025AY 2013-141 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, considering the principles laid down by the Apex Court, condoned both the delay in filing the first appeal and the delay before the Tribunal. The case was restored to the file of the CIT(A) for reconsideration on merits, and the assessee was directed to substantiate its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] for AY 2013-14. The CIT(A) had dismissed the first appeal for want of condonation of a 77-day delay. The current appeal before the tribunal also had a delay of 24 days, which the assessee sought to have condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and the Tribunal; and to decide the appeal on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” 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: 2013-14) Naseem Ishrat Income-tax Officer, बनाम/ 81, Sangam Vihar Colony, Ward 2(3)(5), Jhansi. Vs. Sipri Bazar, Jhansi (UP). �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ABFPI-5615-M (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Pankaj Gargh, Adv. – Ld. AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 18-02-2025 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) 2013-14 arises out of an order passed by of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [CIT(A)] on 30-11-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 30-05-2023. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition under the head capital gains and determined total income at Rs.103.50 Lacs. The Ld. CIT(A) did not admit first appeal for want of condonation of delay of 77 days. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The registry has noted delay of 24 days in the appeal. The Ld. AR has prayed for adjudication of the appeal on merits which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

2.

Keeping in mind the guiding principles laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987; (2) TMI 61 SC), we condone both the delays and restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for reconsideration on merits. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case.

3.

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

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →