MOZART GLOBAL FURNITURE,KOTTAKKAL vs. ACIT, KOZHIKKODE
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, citing principles of natural justice and the fact that similar delays were condoned in connected cases. The appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeals were dismissed by the CIT(A) for delay in filing. The delay was attributed to severe family tragedies and business distress, including the death of a son and a family illness. The assessee argued that similar delays were condoned in connected cases.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned due to genuine hardship and in light of previous condonations in similar cases.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri George Mathan, JM & Shri B.R. Baskaran, AM
These appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in Kozhikode/10664, 10665, 10663, 10722,10741, 10800, 10793 & 10794/2018-19 for assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16.
Shri Shaji Poulose, CA represented the assessee and Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR represented Revenue.
It was the submission of the learned A.R. that the appeals of the assessee have been dismissed on account of delay in filing the appeals. It was the submission that these appeals relate to levy under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the period before 01.06.2015. It was the submission that under identical circumstances in the case of K.T. to 179/Coch/2021 2 M/s. Mozart Gobal Furniture Saidalavi for assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1034506207(1) dated 29.07.2021 and in assessee’s own case in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021- 22/10372541106(1) dated 26.11.2021 the learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi had condoned the delay. It was the submission the before the learned CIT(A) it was specifically submitted that the grounds for condonation relate to “the disease in the family of Shri K.T. Saidalavi which relates to his sons. One of his sons Shajahan Kunnathodi expired. The other son is also suffering from the same disease. The disease is known as Crohn’s disease which is running as a streak in the family. Sample medical records attached as Annexure 3. The above disease effected all the facets of the business. The loans obtained from banks etc. Became bad resulting in attachment under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (54 of 2002). Sample attachment copy attached as Annexure 4. Thus there is distress and tragedy all around which contributed to the delay in filing the appeal before the First Appellate Authority.” It was the submission that without considering the reasons given the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee on limitation. It was the prayer of the assessee that the appeals may be restored to the file of the CIT(A) for readjudication after condoning the delay.
In reply the learned D.R. vehemently supported the order of the learned CIT(A).
We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that on identical grounds as submitted by the assessee the delay in filing the appeals in connected cases has been condoned and appeals disposed on merits, in the interest of natural justice the delay in filing all these appeals stand condoned and the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. to 179/Coch/2021 3 M/s. Mozart Gobal Furniture 6. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Dictated and pronounced in the open Court on 10th February, 2022.
More judgments on Section 234E
- Mulchand Ramkishan Laddha, Pune vs Income Tax Officer (TDS-2), PuneITA 874/PUN/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2669/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2668/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2667/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2666/PUN/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026