VIDYUTH FILTERS,KARIMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KARIMNAGAR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for de novo consideration, granting the assessee an opportunity to be heard.
What were the facts?
The assessee firm's appeal was filed late due to the death of its partner, which prevented timely representation. The original assessment was ex-parte as the assessee did not appear or provide details to the Assessing Officer.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present its case before the Assessing Officer.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
order. Since the partner was expired and nobody was there to take care the affairs of the firm, the assessee could not take steps to file the appeal within the time allowed under the Act. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion, that when the assessee has explained the delay with the above reason, the learned CIT (A) ought to have condoned the delay. Thus, I am of the considered opinion that the delay in filing of the appeal before the first appellate authority should be condoned and I condone the delay in filing of the appeal before the first appellate authority.
Having said so, let me come back to the issue. Admittedly, the assessment before the Assessing Officer was ex- parte, because the assessee neither appeared nor filed any details before the Assessing Officer. As I have observed in earlier part of this order, the partner of the assessee firm was expired and because of this the firm could not represent before the Assessing Officer and file necessary details. Since the appellant firm could not file any evidence before the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer has passed ex-parte best judgment order, in my opinion, to give one more opportunity to the assessee, the matter needs to go back to the file of the Assessing Officer instead of the learned CIT (A). Thus, I set aside the order passed by the learned CIT (A) and restored the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer and direct the Assessing Officer to reconsider the issue denovo in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
ITA 348 of 2024 Vidyuth Filters Karimnagar
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
