SHRI RAMJIBHAI ARJANBHAI PANSARA,JAMNAGAR vs. THEINCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(5), JAMNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 436/RJT/2018Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 September 2022AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) as the reasons provided by the assessee appeared genuine. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 51 days. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to this delay. The assessee cited personal difficulties, illiteracy, and distance from a Chartered Accountant as reasons for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned on the grounds of personal difficulties and illiteracy. The primary issue was the condonation of delay to allow the appeal to be heard on its merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 56(2)(viii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT

Before: Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI WASEEM AHMED

For Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, DR
Hearing: 23.08.2022Pronounced: 14.09.2022

PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.09.2018 passed by the CIT(A), Jamnagar for the Assessment Year 2014-15.

2.

The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:

“1. Ld. CIT (A) erred on facts and in law in refusing to condone delay of 51 days in filing of first appeal without appreciating that appellant was located in village of Jamnagar District and being not much literate and being under depression due to personal difficulties could not approach Chartered Accountant situated at Ahmedabad to understand implications arising out of assessment order and to get the appeal prepared and filed before CIT(A), Jamnagar.”

3.

The assessee filed its return of income on 12.09.2014 declaring total income of Rs.3,33,482/-. The assessment order was passed on 26.10.2016 thereby making addition of Rs.30,01,332/- under Section 56(2)(viii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

4.

Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay.

Assessment Year: 2014-15 Page 2 of 2 5. At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite giving notice. The submissions made by the assessee before the CIT(A) and before the Assessing Officer are taken on record as submissions before us.

6.

Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A).

7.

We have heard the Ld. DR and perused all the relevant material available on record. The assessee in grounds of appeal has categorically explained that the assessee was located in village and not much literate and because of personal difficulties could not approach the Chartered Accountant situated at Anand and therefore, there was delay of 51 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). This appears to be genuine reason and, therefore, the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) is condoned and in the interest of justice we remand back the issues on merit to be decided by the CIT(A) afresh. Needless to say the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following the principles of natural justice.

8.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on this 14th day of September, 2022.

More judgments on Section 56(2)(viii)

All 364 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(viii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →