Mela Ram & Sons. v. CIT

29 ITR 607Supreme Court of India1956#4021 most cited

What is Mela Ram & Sons. v. CIT authority for?

An appeal presented out of time is still an appeal, and an order dismissing it as time-barred is an order passed in appeal. An appeal decided without considering the delay is required to be decided on condonation of delay even if admitted.

29

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Mela Ram & Sons v. CIT · 29 ITR 607 · SC · condonation of delay · appeal out of time · dismissal as time-barred · appellate power · admitting appeal

Sections most often in play

Section 115BACSection 119Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 200ASection 234ESection 250(6)

Issues it is cited on

section 36(1)(viia)section 250(6)condonation of delayprescribedpersonsection 143section 13section 14indiabusinesscompanysection 143(3)

Judgments citing Mela Ram & Sons. v. CIT

M/S. Ryatara Seva Sahakari Sangha Niyamita Kengeri, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3(2)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2643/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Ravish Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 80P

…finding has been expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan Vs. Krishnamurthy, reported in AIR 1998 SC 3222. The Tribunal has also considered the vision in the case of Mela Ram and sons Vs. ITA Nos.3228 to 3234/2013 CIT, reported in 29 ITR 607 (SC) and accordingly, the delay in filing appeal was condoned. The facts in the present case are also similar as in this case also due to mistake of Chartered Accountant the assessee could not file the appeals in time. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the various decisions mentioned above/ which was considere…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1), Jabalpur vs. M/S. Jashn Beneficiary Trust, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 107/JAB/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur05 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Sanjay Arora

Section 143(3)Section 263

…of ld. CIT(A) inasmuch as he has not decided the assessee’s appeal on merits. This is, apart from s. 153, axiomatic as the assessee’s appeal remains undisposed on merits by the first appellate authority (also refer, inter alia, Mela Ram & Sons vs. CIT [1956] 29 ITR 607 (SC)). The Revenue in fact could carry this appeal before the Hon’ble High Court, so that both its’ appeals, i.e., against the orders by the Tribunal disposing s. 263 and s. 250(6) orders, are heard together by the Hon’ble Court. As far as the Tribunal is concerned, till the time the order dated 15/3/2017 by the Tribunal obtains, the consequent or…

Shri Nitin Sharma, Jabalpur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -2, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 25/JAB/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Sanjay Arora

Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A(1)Section 153CSection 153C(1)Section 153DSection 263Section 7(1)

…s, slow to adopt a construction which deprives the parties of valuable rights inasmuch as when the right of appeal is not preferred within the time prescribed therefor, the other side acquires a valuable right (refer, inter alia, Mela Ram & Sons v. CIT [1956] 29 ITR 607 (SC)). Here it may also be pertinent to state that the provisions of ss. 153A & 153C are designed in a manner to keep one set of proceedings, validly initiated, for assessment of the total income, alive, removing thus the very basis of, or need to, raise such legal issues. That law does not concern itself with trivia, but substantial rights, is a…

M/S. Valley Iron & Steel Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4788/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantasstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Hrishikesh, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 140Section 140ASection 140A(1)Section 140A(3)Section 234BSection 249Section 249(4)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Valley Iron & Steel Co. Ltd., ACIT, Exchange Store Building, Central Circle 5 Vs. Sham Nath Marg, Civil Lines, Jhandewalan, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate Shri Sumit Goel, CA Department by : Shri Kumar Hrishikesh, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 08/05/2019 Date of 20/05/2019 pronouncement O R D E R PER O.P. KANT, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 31/07/2014 passed by t…

Devi Marine Food Exports P Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for 9

ITA 2167/CHNY/2015[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2016AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80H

…the reasoning as brought out above, your petition for revising the revision order dated 31.10.2006 is not maintainable and hence rejected. 8. We as a quasi judicial body draw support from the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Mela Ram & Sons vs. CIT 29 ITR 607 and we found there is sufficient cause considering the factual circumstances in the interest of justice, we direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to condone the delay and admit the appeal and ITA No. 2167/Mds/2015. :- 11 -: adjudicate the grounds on merits after giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. In the result,…

Sudha Organics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

Accordingly, the appeals of all the three years are allowed by holding as above”

ITA 3239/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta Nos.3235 To 3241/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2003-04 To 2009-10 बनाम/ M/S. Sudha Organics Pvt. The Dcit, Central Circle-45, Ltd., Mumbai Vs. 1, Dorf Ketal Tower, Orlem, Malad (W), Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcs 9904D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Champa Purohit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri R.A. Dhyani सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :03.02.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement :10.02.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals By The Assessee Are Preferred Against The Very Same Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-38,Mumbai Dated 23.08.2011 Pertaining To Assessment Years 2003-04 To 2009-10. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, They Were Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Appellant: Shri Champa PurohitFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani
Section 23(1)

…has been expressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy, reported in AIR 1998 SC 3222. The Tribunal has also considered the decision in the case of Mela Ram and sons Vs. ITA Nos.3228 to 3234/2013 4 CIT, reported in 29 ITR 607 (SC) and accordingly, the delay in filing appeal was condoned. The facts in the present case are also similar as in this case also due to mistake of Chartered Accountant the assessee could not file the appeals in time. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the various decisions mentioned above, which was considere…

Sudha Organics P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

Accordingly, the appeals of all the three years are allowed by holding as above”

ITA 3235/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta Nos.3235 To 3241/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2003-04 To 2009-10 बनाम/ M/S. Sudha Organics Pvt. The Dcit, Central Circle-45, Ltd., Mumbai Vs. 1, Dorf Ketal Tower, Orlem, Malad (W), Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcs 9904D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Champa Purohit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri R.A. Dhyani सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :03.02.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement :10.02.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals By The Assessee Are Preferred Against The Very Same Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-38,Mumbai Dated 23.08.2011 Pertaining To Assessment Years 2003-04 To 2009-10. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, They Were Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Appellant: Shri Champa PurohitFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani
Section 23(1)

…has been expressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy, reported in AIR 1998 SC 3222. The Tribunal has also considered the decision in the case of Mela Ram and sons Vs. ITA Nos.3228 to 3234/2013 4 CIT, reported in 29 ITR 607 (SC) and accordingly, the delay in filing appeal was condoned. The facts in the present case are also similar as in this case also due to mistake of Chartered Accountant the assessee could not file the appeals in time. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the various decisions mentioned above, which was considere…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Vishu Impex Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the

ITA 3703/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar Gupta, Adv
Section 275(1)(c)

…ng has been expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy, reported in AIR 1998 SC 3222. The Tribunal has also considered the decision in the case of Mela Ram and sons Vs. ITA Nos.3228 to 3234/2013 CIT, reported in 29 ITR 607 (SC) and accordingly, the delay in filing appeal was condoned. The facts in the present case are also similar as in this case also due to mistake of Chartered Accountant the assessee could not file the appeals in time. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the various decisions mentioned above, which was considere…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Vishu Impex Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the

ITA 2765/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar Gupta, Adv
Section 275(1)(c)

…ng has been expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy, reported in AIR 1998 SC 3222. The Tribunal has also considered the decision in the case of Mela Ram and sons Vs. ITA Nos.3228 to 3234/2013 CIT, reported in 29 ITR 607 (SC) and accordingly, the delay in filing appeal was condoned. The facts in the present case are also similar as in this case also due to mistake of Chartered Accountant the assessee could not file the appeals in time. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the various decisions mentioned above, which was considere…