BRAIN HILARY CASTELINO,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(3)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3386/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 November 2016AY 2010-112 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 restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) in the interest of justice. The assessee was permitted to file a condonation petition for the delay, and the CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal after considering it.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a delay of ten days in filing. The assessee's counsel explained that the delay occurred due to a change in counsel and requested the matter be restored to the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal without considering the condonation petition for a minor delay, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD & SHRI N.K. PRADHAN

For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, D.R
Hearing: 20.10.2016Pronounced: 30.11.2016

Per C.N. Prasad, Judicial Member:

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-26, Mumbai [(hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] dated 31.03.2015 for the assessment year 2010-11 arising out of the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act.

2.

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed this appeal inlimine observing that the assessee did not file condonation petition for delay of ten days. He further submits that the condonation petition could not be filed because there was change in counsel and the new counsel could not file the condonation petition for the delay of 10 days. Therefore the Ld. Counsel requested for restoring the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) in the interest of justice with a direction to accept the condonation and dispose off the appeal after considering the condonation petition.

4.

On hearing both the parties and taking the totality of facts and circumstances into consideration, we are of the view that in the interest of justice this appeal should be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) and the assessee is free to submit the condonation petition for the delay of 10 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) shall decide the appeal considering the petition for condonation of delay in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Thus we restore the appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 30.11.2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →