MALPUR TALUKA PRIMARY TEACHERS SAHKARI SAKH & GRAHAK SAHKARI MANDLI,MALPUR vs. THE ACIT., HIMATNAGAR CIRCLE, HIMATNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 822/AHD/2023Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 April 2024AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), Ms MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after condoning the delay. This was done in the interest of justice and fair play, considering the assessee's explanation and the revenue's non-opposition.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a 99-day delay. The assessee explained the delay was due to an email ID issue with their tax consultant's staff who had left the firm.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned and the appeal decided on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144B,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘’ SMC’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED

For Appellant: Shri S.N Divatia, with Shri Samir Vora, ARs
For Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 14/03/2024Pronounced: 03/04/2024

आदेश/O R D E R

PER WASEEM AHMED ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (in short “Ld.CIT(A)”) arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s.144B r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (here-in-after referred to as "the Act") relevant to the Assessment Year 2020-21.

2.

The learned AR before us at the outset submitted that there was a delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT-A for 99 days. As per the ld. CIT-A, the assessee failed to give any reasonable justification for such delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, the ld. CIT-A has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of the delay in filing the appeal.

3.

The learned AR before us filed an affidavit of the assessee explaining the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal. It was explained that the email ID of the staff working in the office of the tax consultant was furnished in the income tax portal who left the office of the tax consultant and therefore the assessee failed to justify the delay occurred in filing the appeal before the learned CIT-A. The ld. AR thus prayed before us to restore the issue to the file of the ld. CIT-A for fresh consideration about the reasons attributed in filing the appeal before him (the ld. CIT-A) and further direct him to decide the issue on merit after condoning such delay.

4.

On the other hand, the ld. DR after considering the reason for the delay in filing the appeal and the length of the delay, did not oppose on condoning of delay. As such the ld. DR left the issue at the discretion of the Bench.

5.

Heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. Considering the prayer made by the ld. AR for the assessee and the concession extended by the learned DR appearing on behalf of the revenue, we are inclined to restore the appeal to the file of the learned CIT-A, in the interest of justice and fair play, for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law with the liberty to the assessee raise its contention along with the necessary documents before the learned CIT-A. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court on 03/04/2024 at Ahmedabad.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →