AASIFE BIRIYANI PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, holding that the Rs. 500/- fee was appropriate as the appeal was dismissed on procedural grounds and not merits. The Tribunal also granted one more opportunity for a denovo assessment by the Assessing Officer.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(Appeals) due to delay in filing. The assessee paid Rs. 500/- as appeal fees, but the registry raised a defect notice for short payment, demanding Rs. 10,000/-. The assessee also failed to appear before the AO and CIT(A).
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal fees paid were correct when the appeal was dismissed on procedural grounds, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Dr. Ajith Kumar Pandey v. ITAT7 citing310 ITR 195 · 2009 · HC
- Rajakamal Polymers (P) Ltd. v. CIT7 citing291 ITR 314 · 2007 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI
PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)
This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1066342333 (1) dated 02.07.2024. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Corporate
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.
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.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026