SHIVRATAN MOTILALJI RATHI HUF,JALNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALNA
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?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide 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.
- Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji3,926 citing167 ITR 471 · 1987 · SC
- 438 ITR 296196 citing438 ITR 296 · 2021 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE [VIRTUAL HEARING]
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
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.
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.
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
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
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetanj Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Namita Behera vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Ratul Boro vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Jashwant Sharma vs. The Union Of INDIA And A4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026