BAIDYANATH DHAM ENTERPRISE,MURSHIDABAD V. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU/ ITO, WARD - 42(1), MURSHIDABAD, MURSHIDABAD

ITA 1133/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Baidyanath Dham Enterprise, the appellant, who filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-10, Mumbai, concerning the Assessment Year 2018-19. The initial appeal was not admitted by the CIT(A) due to alleged incorrect submissions in Form No. 35 and a reported delay in filing the appeal. The ITAT found that the CIT(A) had erred in not admitting the appeal based on a clerical mistake and misinterpretation of the filing delay. The Tribunal decided to condone the delay and correct the clerical error, emphasizing that the case should be decided on its merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 36240 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 250; 143(1)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'एसएमसी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री प्रदीप क ुमार चौबे, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री संजय अवस्थी, लेखा सदस्य क े समक्ष Before PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 1133/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Baidyanath Dham Enterprise……………………………………………Appellant [PAN: AANFB 3088 N] Vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru/ITO, Ward-42(1), Murshidabad…………Respondent Appearances: Assessee represented by: None. Department represented by: Kallol Mistry, JCIT. Date of concluding the hearing : September 10th, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order : November 7th, 2024 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year (in short ‘AY’) 2018-19 is directed against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- 10, Mumbai [in short ld. ‘CIT(A)’] dated 26.03.2024 arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 143(1) of the Act dated 31.05.2019. 1.1. None appeared on behalf of the assessee, the ld. D/R is present. 2. After hearing the ld. D/R, we have decided to dispose off this appeal on the material available on the record. On perusal of the ld. CIT(A)’s order, it I.T.A. No.: 1133/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Baidyanath Dham Enterprise. Page 2 of 3 appears to us that appeal of the appellant has not been admitted on the ground that appellant has made incorrect submission in column no. 14 of Form No. 35 that there is no delay in filing the present appeal. We have perused the record and find that an order u/s 143(1) of the Act has been passed for the AY 2018-19 dated 31.05.2019. The ld. CIT(A) by not admitting the appeal has assigned the reason that on perusal of Form No. 35 appellant in column no. 2 has stated that he filed present appeal against the order dated 31.05.2019 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act though the order was passed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Further, the ld. CIT(A) did not admit the appeal on the ground that there was delay of 5 days in filing the appeal but in Form No. 35 the appellant has mentioned that there was no delay. On perusal of the ld. CIT(A)’s order it appears to us that appellant on receiving intimation with regard to the deficiency in Form No. 35 has submitted that due to the clerical mistake Section under which the assessment has been made has wrongly been written as Section 143(3) of the Act in place of Section 143(1) of the Act. We further find that he has also filed condonation of delay in filing of the memo of appeal and his condonation petition is as follows: I.T.A. No.: 1133/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Baidyanath Dham Enterprise. Page 3 of 3 2.1. On perusal of the factual aspect of the case, we find that appellant has explained regarding this deficiency in Form No. 35 that it was a clerical mistake and further he has also submitted the condonation petition, which according to us satisfactory explanation to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay in filing of the appeal is hereby condoned. Regarding the deficiency in inserting the Section is also hereby corrected. The case should be decided on merit and as such the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is hereby set aside, case is restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) to hear the matter by giving an opportunity to the assessee and pass a fresh order. 3. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 7th November, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- [Sanjay Awasthi] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 07.11.2024 Bidhan (P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Baidyanath Dham Enterprise, Ratanpur, Dhuliyan, Murshidabad, West Bengal, 742202. 2. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru/ITO, Ward-42(1), Murshidabad. 3. CIT(A)-10, Mumbai. 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata. //True copy // By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches Kolkata "