KAILASH SH9IPPING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP. CIRCLE-4(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 118/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 April 2024AY 2021-22Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restored the appeal back to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. The assessee was directed to substantiate their case properly.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) which was dismissed as belated by 246 days. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT during the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal as belated without considering sufficient cause, and whether the assessee should be given an opportunity to present their case on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 249

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

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

Hearing: 16.04.2024Pronounced: 16.04.2024

आदेश / O R D E R MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)

1.

This appeal by assessee is arising out of the order of the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Jaipur in Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1058547851 (1), dated 07.12.2023. The assessment was framed by the ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru for the assessment year 2021-2022, u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’the Act’) vide order dated 26.07.2022.

2.

In the instant case, the appellant filed the appeal against the order under section 143(1) of the Act dated 26.07.2022 before the Ld. CIT(A) but the appeal was belatedly filed and there was delay of 246 days. Ld. CIT(A) held that the appeal filed is not in conformity with the provisions of section 249 of the Act and there is no sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal hence dismissed the appeal as not maintainable.

3.

At the time of hearing before us none appeared for the assessee. The Ld. Senior Departmental Representative pleaded for dismissal of the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to appear before the ld. first appellate authority.

4.

From the case record, it emerges that CPC u/s 143(1) made addition on account of disallowance chargeable to tax u/s 23 and disallowance chargeable to tax u/s 41 of the Income Tax Act.

5.

Though we concur with the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however keeping in mind the principle of natural justice and reasons given in Form No.35 we deem it fit to condone the delay and grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate his case forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the disposal of the appeal on merits. The appeal stands allowed for a statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in 2021-2022 is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced on 16th day of April , 2024, at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 249

All 507 judgments and leading authorities on Section 249 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →