TANALUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, GHAZIABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, noting that the issue was likely in favour of the assessee on merits. The appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeals before the CIT(A) were dismissed in limini due to delay in filing. The assessee contended that the delay was caused by non-receipt of the order levying late fee under Section 234E.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) should be condoned, and whether the matter should be decided on merits despite the technicality of delay.
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
Per: George Mathan, JM
These are appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 03.04.2021 in to ITA No. 68/Coch/2021 for assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16.
Shri Amaljith P.J., CA appeared on behalf of the assessee and Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of Revenue.
At the outset the learned A.R. of the assessee submitted that the appeals of the assessee have been dismissed in limini on account of delay in filing the appeals. It was further submitted the delay was because the orders of the assessing authority levying late fee under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was not served on the assessee. It was the submission of the learned A.R. that the assessee has no objection if the delay is condoned and the issue is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for readjudication. to 68/Coch/2021 2 M/s. Tanalur Service Co-op. Bank Ltd.
In reply the learned D.R. did not raise any serious objection in restoring the matter to the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merits after condonation of delay. Apropos para 3.3 of the order of learned CIT(A) the reason for delay is seen to have been brought before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals on the ground that the intimation was sent on two e-mail IDs. However, the claim of the assessee cannot be outrightly rejected. Assessees would normally respond to the levy. Further even on merits the issue is found to be in favour of the assessee. In these circumstances when technicality is pitted against merits technicality must step back. We are of the view that the delay in filing the appeals should be condoned and the issue decided on merits.
The CIT(A) has not decided the issue on merits. Hence the issue in these appeals are restored to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Dictated and pronounced in the open Court on 9th 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
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026