Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Girish Agrawal
Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), 1
Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Daisy Technosoft Pvt. Ltd. (Now Dream Buildhome Pvt. Ltd.) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 13.09.2023 passed for A.Y. 2013-14.
The assessee has taken seven grounds of appeal but in brief, the first preliminary grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in construing that the appeal is time barred by 70 days and since the assessee failed to explain the delay by filing a valid application, this appeal deserves to be dismissed being time barred.
With the assistance of ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. It has been pointed out to us that the impugned assessment order was passed on 21.03.2016. This was the first year when on-line appeal was required to be filed. The assessee first filed the manual appeal, which was filed well within the time. The ld. CIT(Appeals) has issued a letter dated 06.06.2016 asking the assessee to file appeal online and accordingly the assessee has filed the appeal online before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Due to this procedural aspect, the alleged delay has been construed by the ld. CIT(Appeals).
On due consideration of the above facts, we are of the view that ends of justice would meet if we condone the alleged delay and remit this issue back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) for deciding the appeal on merit.
Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Daisy Technosoft Pvt. Ltd. (Now Dream Buildhome Pvt. Ltd.) 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25/01/2024.