SOMNATH ASSOCIATES,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(2), VADODARA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) did not provide an opportunity for a hearing on merits. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order, directed the condonation of the delay in filing the appeal, and instructed the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits after providing the assessee with another opportunity to be heard.
What were the facts?
The assessee partnership firm, engaged in real estate development, had a survey action where a partner declared income. The Assessing Officer rejected a portion of partner's remuneration claim on the grounds that deduction under section 40(b) is not allowable against income declared during survey. The assessee filed an appeal with significant delay, citing lack of knowledge among other partners and the death of their tax consultant.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal and whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present their case on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH
Before: DR. BRR Kumar & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar
PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the exparte appellate order dated 03-05-2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad arising out of the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2014-15. I.T.A No. 1293/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2014-15 2
Brief facts of the case is that the appellant is a Partnership Firm engaged in the business of Real Estate Development and Construction of residential/commercial
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 133A
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ranchhodbhai Kurjibhai Kakadiya, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 553/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Amr Infrastructures, Hyderabad vs DCIT., Central Circle-2(1), HyderabadITA 818/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Shri Vikaskumar Macwan, Nadiad vs Dc/ACIT Central Circle 3, VadodaraITA 2022/AHD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026