MITTAL PARK CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (A), DELHI, DELHI
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 1029/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2012-13
Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalmittal Park Co-Opp. Housing Society Ltd. 44, Mittal Park, Janardhan Mhatra Marg, Ruiapark, Juhu-Mumbai-400049. Pan: Aaaam2918E ...... Appellant Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (National Faceless Appeal Centre), Delhi. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Manoj Mahimkar Respondent By : Sh. Dilip K. Shah, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/11/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (For Short ‘Nfac’), Delhi Dated 06.04.2022 Under Section 254 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) For A.Y. 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Honourable Commissioner Of Income Tax- (Appeal), Nfac, Delhi, [Hon. Cit- (A)] Has Erred On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In The Law Declining To Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal.
For Appellant: Sh. Manoj MahimkarFor Respondent: Sh. Dilip K. Shah, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 249(2)Section 254Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)
…on of delay, the onus of proving which lies on the PARTMENT appellant/applicant as clearly laid down in the judicial pronouncements by the Highest Courts of Law. In the case of Perumon Bhagvathy Devaswom, Perinadu Village v. Bhargavi Amma (Dead) by LRS, (2008)8 SCC 321, the Hon'ble SC had enunciated certain principles in which are applicable while considering applications for Condonation of delay under Section 5 which may be summarized as follows: - The words "sufficient cause", as appearing in Section 5 of Limitation Act, should receive a liberal construction when the delay is not on account of any dilatory tact…
