ITW INDIA SUPERANNUATION FUND,GURGAON vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 37/HYD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 February 2024AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA (Vice President), SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, following a co-ordinate bench's decision in an identical case. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to re-do the assessment after obtaining a rectified return.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay. The CIT(A) refused to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine. The assessee had initially pursued a rectification under section 154 before filing the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing an appeal should be condoned when the assessee was pursuing an alternative remedy, and whether procedural lapses should deny a legitimate claim for deduction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 10(25)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY

For Respondent: Shri N. Raja Kumar, DR
Hearing: 19/02/2024

आदेश / ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the order dated 30/11/2023 passed by the learned Addl/JCIT(Appeals)-1, Jaipur, in the case of ITW India Superannuation Fund (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2015-16, assessee preferred this appeal.

2.

At the outset, learned AR submitted that there was a delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A), and the learned CIT(A) refused to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine. Learned AR submitted that the assessee, ITW India Superannuation Fund pleaded to condone the delay on the ground that the assessee was pursuing alternative remedy of rectification under section 154 of the Act, seeking relief, but subsequently, on realizing the proper procedure, they filed the appeal before the learned CIT(A), which was dismissed by the learned CIT(A) in limine. It is the submission of the learned AR that in the case of ITW India Gratuity Fund, for the same assessment year 2015-16, under identical circumstances, a Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in by order dated 23/12/2021 condoned the delay of 1090 days and remanded the issue to the file of learned jurisdictional Assessing Officer holding that the claim for deduction under section 10(25) of the Act cannot be denied basing on the procedural lapses. Since the facts are identical, learned AR prayed to follow the view taken in the case of ITW India Gratuity Fund (supra).

3.

Though the learned DR vehemently argued in justification of the impugned order, the fact remains that in the case of ITW India Gratuity Fund (supra), a Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal condoned the delay on the ground of prosecution of the remedy, but before a wrong forum and restored the issue to the file of the learned jurisdictional Assessing Officer.

4.

In these circumstances, while respectfully following the view taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITW India Gratuity Fund (supra), we condone the delay in this case also, duly directing the learned jurisdictional Assessing Officer to re-do the assessment, after obtaining the rectified return of income from the assessee, by providing adequate time and thereafter pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merit. We hold and direct so.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on this the 28th day of February, 2024.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →