ARPUTHAAJ RAJAN SUDHAKAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO,NON CORP WARD-1(6), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 498/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 May 2024AY 2019-20Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the first appeal should not have been dismissed on delay, considering the substantial delay was covered by the Covid-19 lockdown. The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to admit the appeal and re-adjudicate it on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) which was dismissed for a delay of 220 days. The assessee then filed a further appeal before the ITAT, noting a 9-day delay in filing the ITAT appeal, which was condoned.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should have been condoned, especially considering the Covid-19 lockdown period.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

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

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ/वाल ,लेखा सद4 एवं माननीय +ी मनु कुमार िग7र, �ाियक सद4 के सम8। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Shri Arputharaj Rajan Sudhakar ITO, बनाम/ No.30, Aadijan Street, Non- Corporate Ward -1(6), Vs. Mandaveli, Chennai – 600 028. Chennai. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AVGPS-5383-K (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ� कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 30-04-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 06-05-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2019-20 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 19-12-2023 in the matter of an intimation issued by CPC u/s 143(1) of the Act on 05-04-2021. The Ld. CIT(A) did not admit the appeal for want of condonation of delay of 220 days since the assessee could not demonstrate sufficient cause. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The registry has noted a delay of 9 days in the appeal which stand condoned. Considering the period of delay, the delay is condoned. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal.

2.

We are of the opinion that the first appeal should not have been dismissed on delay since substantial delay was covered by Covid-19 Lockdown. Nevertheless, we direct Ld. CIT(A) to admit the appeal of the assessee an re-adjudicate the same on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with disposal of appeal on merits. 3. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 6th May, 2024

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →