SHIVRATAN MOTILALJI RATHI HUF,JALNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALNA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1257/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 March 2024AY 2009-10Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the significant delay in filing the appeal before the NFAC, considering the reasons provided and the Supreme Court's directions regarding the COVID-19 period. The appeal has been restored to the NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the NFAC was dismissed due to a delay of 1943 days in filing. The assessee cited internal HUF disputes and the COVID-19 pandemic period for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the NFAC should be condoned, considering the reasons provided by the assessee and relevant legal precedents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE [VIRTUAL HEARING]

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 14.03.2024Pronounced: 26.03.2024

Date of Hearing : 14.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 26.03.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2009-10, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1056672312(1), dated 29.09.2023, involving proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that the learned NFAC lower appellate order has refused to condone 1943 days delay in filing of the assessee’s appeal. The 2 ITA.No.1257/PUN/2023 Shivratan Motilalji Rathi HUF Revenue could hardly dispute that the assessee’s condonation averments had given justifiable reasons beyond its control that on account of differences within the members of the concerned HUF, the case took so long time to be filed in the lower appellate process. This is indeed coupled with the fact that a part of the aforegoing period from 19-03-2020 to 28-02-2022 to the date of actual filing therein, i.e., 21-07-2020, has also been included despite the fact that hon’ble apex court directions in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In Re 438 ITR 296 (SC) setting the issue at rest qua Covid-19 pandemic outbreak period for all intents and purposes under the limitation law.

3.

Be that as it may, their lordships yet another decision in Collector Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) has also settled the law that all such technical aspects must make a way for the cause of substantial justice. Faced with this situation, the impugned delay of 1943 days before the learned NFAC stands condoned in very terms. The assessee’s substantive grounds pleaded in the instant appeal are hereby restored to the NFAC for fresh appropriate adjudication in accordance with law, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing subject to rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s onus only to plead and prove all facts with the relevant evidence(s) in consequential proceedings.

3 ITA.No.1257/PUN/2023 Shivratan Motilalji Rathi HUF

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 26th March, 2024.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →