SALTORA STONE CRUSHER OWNERS-WELFARE ASSOCIATION,SALTORA, BANKURA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1), BANKURA, BANKURA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 53/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 March 2024AY 2017-2018Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg (Judicial Member), Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, citing the principle that substance should prevail over technicalities. It held that the case needed to be restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a welfare association, filed an appeal with a significant delay due to expired office bearers, COVID-19 disruptions, and a lack of initiative. Both the assessment order and the appellate order were passed ex-parte without deciding on merits.

What were the issues?

The primary issues were the condonation of delay in filing the appeal and the validity of ex-parte orders passed by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) without deciding the case on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg&Shri Rajesh Kumar]

This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- PCIT, Asansol [hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. PCIT’] dated 30.12.2021 passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for the assessment year 2017-18.

2 AY: 2017-18 Saltora Stone Crusher Owners-Welfare Association 2. At the outset we note that there is a delay of 253 days in filing the appeal. We note that the assessee is a welfare association of Saltora Stone Crusher Owners. It was brought to our notice that the tenure of office bearers had expired and nobody took initiative to attend income tax proceedings. It was also pointed out that due to the COVID pandemaic , all the activities of association had totally come to a stand-still and the operations of the association were totally in disruption and no one was there to attend the day today matters. It was also stated that it is only in the month of December, 2022 that a Counsel of the assessee was instructed to look after and attend the income tax proceedings and accordingly the appeal documents were prepared and the appeal was filed. The Ld. Counsel of the assessee prayed before us that the delay in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate and the assessee is not going to be benefitted by the said delayed filing of appeal in any manner. Considering all these facts , we are of the opinion that there are reasons for the said delay which the assessee has explained. In our opinion , the assessee should not be suffer to technicalities of the matter as the assessee should get opportunity to be heard as has been decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 (SC) wherein it has been held that the substance must prevail over the technicalities. Accordingly we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.

3.

At the outset, we note that the assessment order as well as the appellate order have been passed ex-parte without deciding the same on merit. The assessment were passed ex-parte by the AO when the assessee failed to turn up on the date of hearing and the AO estimated the income at Rs. 15,68,720/- by making two additions namely Rs. 4,60,720/- estimating @ 8% on Rs. 57,59,000/- being the money deposited inot bank during period other than demonetization period whereas the money deposited during demonetization period of Rs. 11,08,000/- was added u/s 69A of the Act.

4.

In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) simply confirmed the order of AO without giving any reasons.

3 AY: 2017-18 Saltora Stone Crusher Owners-Welfare Association 5. Considering these facts, we are of the view that the appeal of the assessee needs to be restored to the file of AO so that the assessee could be heard on merits and the case be decided de novo. Accordingly we restore the issue back to the file of AO with the direction to decide the same afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 19th March, 2024

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →