KALIAPERUMAL SELVARAJ,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1370/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 February 2024AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI (Judicial Member), SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to remand the matter to the CIT(A) to condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. The assessee was given liberty to file evidence in support of its claims.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to file a return of income. The AO made additions based on information received. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) with a significant delay, which was not condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal and whether the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication with additional evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 69C,Section 69,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke
For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

आदेश / ORDER

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :

1.

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 22-10-2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi for assessment year 2018-19.

2.

The assessee raised six grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for consideration is as to whether the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi justified in confirming the order of AO without condoning the delay in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. The brief facts relating to the case are that the assessee is an individual, no return of income filed. The AO on the basis of information, noticing the receipt of interest, salary, purchase of motor vehicle and immovable property, issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act, requesting the assessee to file return of income, but no return of income was filed in response to such notice. The AO proceeded to make additions on account of interest, salary and unexplained expenses u/s. 69C of the Act and unexplained investment u/s. 69 of the Act vide its order dated 25-03-2023 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi with a delay of 117 days. The assessee explained the reasons for the said delay which were reproduced in pages 16 and 17 of the impugned order. The CIT(A) found the said reasons are not valid in the absence of any supporting evidence. The CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi rejected the said reasons and did not condone the delay of 117 days. Having aggrieved by the dismissal of appeal in limine, now, the assessee is before us.

4.

The ld. AR drew our attention at pages 108 to 121 of the paper book and argued that the appeal could not be filed in time due to health emergency of the daughter of the assessee. Further, he has undertaken that the assessee is ready to prosecute his case before the AO, if this Tribunal afford an opportunity to the assessee by remanding the matter to the file of AO. Further, he fairly conceded that no evidences were furnished before the AO due to the reasons as explained for supporting the delay. He drew our attention to pages 1 to 107 of the paper book and argued that the said evidences are filed before this Tribunal as additional evidences which are in support of assessee’s contention regarding the additions made by the AO. The ld. DR submits that no evidences filed before both the authorities below and it requires fresh adjudication in view of new evidences provided in paper book. Taking into consideration the submissions of ld. AR and ld. DR and documentary evidences filed in support of assessee’s contention, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi with a direction to condone the delay of 117 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. The assessee is liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of its claim. The assessee shall comply with the notices issued by the NFAC, Delhi, in case of any failure, NFAC, Delhi is liberty to dispose off the appeal of assessee as contemplated under sub- section (6) of section 250 of the Act. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

5.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21st February, 2024.

Sd/- Sd/- (G.D. Padmahshali) (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ददनाांक / Dated : 21st February, 2024. रवि आदेश की प्रतततलतप अग्रेतषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. तवभागीय प्रतततनति, आयकर अपीलीय अतिकरण, “ए” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गार्ड फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. //सत्यातपत प्रतत// True Copy// आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,

िररष्ठ वनजी सविि / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →