PRAKASH MAHIBA DEVI,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), TIRUPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 544/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2024AY 2013-14Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the delay was minor, excluding the pandemic period, and should have been condoned. The matter should have been adjudicated on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for a delay of 94 days. The assessee had failed to appear before the lower authorities. The AO had made an addition of Rs. 16 Lacs in the assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for a minor delay without considering the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

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 passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] on 10-01-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 15-03-2022. The assessee has failed to appear before any of the lower authorities. The Ld. AR pleaded for another opportunity of hearing which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

2.

In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of cash deposit of Rs.16 Lacs. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for want of condonation of delay of 94 days. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

3.

We find that excluding Covid-19 Pandemic Lockdown, period, there was minor delay of 94 days which should have been condoned by Ld. CIT(A) and the matter should have been adjudicated on merits. Nevertheless, we direct Ld. CIT(A) to consider the appeal on merits. Accordingly, the appeal stand restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its case.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 20th May, 2024.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →