SMT. RASHIDABANU ABUBAKER MITHA,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(3), NAGPR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 97/NAG/2020Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 December 2022AY 2008-092 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), citing the principle of substantial justice over technicalities. The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 3 days. The CIT(A) refused to condone this delay, leading to the dismissal of the appeal at the lower level. The assessee attributed the delay to communication gaps.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing an appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned in the interest of substantial justice. The interpretation of the principles laid down in Collector Land Acquisition V/s. Mst. Katiji & Others.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR – VIRTUAL COURT

Before: SHRI S. S. GODARA

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jakhotai
For Respondent: Shri G. J. Ninawe
Hearing: 02.11.2022Pronounced: 27.12.2022

PER S. S. GODARA, JM: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2008-09 arises against the CIT(A)-1, Nagpur’s order dated 25.02.2020 passed in case no. CIT(A)-1/502/2010-11, involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges at the outset that there is hardly any requirement for this tribunal to delve deeper in the relevant factual matrix. Suffice to say, a perusal of the case file reveals that the CIT(A) has refused to condone 3 days delay in filing of the lower appeal as per his detailed discussion in para 4.1 page 3 in issue. That being the case

2 and in light of fact that the assessee’s stand all along has been attributed to the foregoing delay to various communication gaps, I quote hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision Collector Land Acquisition V/s. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) setting the law long back that all such technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice and condone the same in larger interest of justice. Learned CIT(A) is directed to decide the assessee’s appeal afresh on merits as per law preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly.

3.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. Order pronounced on this 27th day of December, 2022. (S. S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; "दनांक / Dated : 27th December, 2022. Sujeet आदेश क" "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ" / The Appellant.

1.

""यथ" / The Respondent.

2.3.

The CIT(A)-1, Nagpur.

4.

The Pr. CIT-1/2/3, Nagpur. िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, नागपुर /

5.

DR, ITAT, Nagpur. गाड" फ़ाइल / Guard File. 6. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, //// Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →