CHANDRASEKARA RAJU DAMBEEKA RAJU,TIRUVALLUR V. DCIT, NCC-7(1), CHENNAI

ITA 2477/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Chandrasekara Raju Dambeeka Raju against the order of the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, which sustained an adjustment of Rs.11,20,137/- related to the claim of deduction under section 80JJAA of the Income Tax Act. The primary contention was the belated filing of form No.10DA within the stipulated time under Section 139(1) of the Act. The assessee argued that the delay was due to the medical leave of the Manager Accounts, who was responsible for filing the appeal. The Tribunal found the reason for the delay plausible and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 472430 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 21-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Appeal Filed On: 23-09-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAVITHA; IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: ARJUN RAJ
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Rectification of order
• Section: 139(1)

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘डी’’ Ɋायपीठ चेɄई मŐ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय ŵी मनोज क ुमार अŤवाल ,लेखा सद˟ एवं माननीय ŵी मनु क ुमार िगįर, Ɋाियक सद˟ क े समƗ। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.2477/Chny/2024 (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2022-2023) Chandrasekara Raju Dambeeka Raju New No.87, Old No.82, Sidco Industrial Estate, Ambattur Chennai 600 098. [PAN: ADAPC 6098D] Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle 7(1) Chennai. (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) अपीलाथȸ कȧ ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. Arjun Raj, Advocate Ĥ×यथȸ कȧ ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. Kavitha, IRS, Addl. CIT. सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 21.11.2024 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.11.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member) This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Mumbai in Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1068126035 (1), dated 29.08.2024 for the assessment year 2022-2023. 2. The only issue in this appeal before us is that ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the adjustment of Rs.11,20,137/- being the claim of deduction u/s.80JJAA of the Act 2 ITA No. 2477 /Chny/2024 on the ground of belated filing of form No.10DA within the time stipulated under Section 139(1) of the Act in the rectification order passed u/s.154 of the Act without assigning proper reasons and justifications. 3. The ld.Authorized Representative for the assessee took us through the order of CIT(A)-NFAC and stated the facts that u/s.154 of the Act was issued by the ADIT, Centralized Processing Centre, Bengaluru on 06.04.2023. But the appeal was filed before CIT(A) on 06.07.2023 thereby there is a delay of 60 days. The ld. AR submitted that the Manager Accounts who was entrusted filing of appeal went on leave on medical grounds, hence there was delay in filing the appeal. In term of the above, the ld.AR stated that this is a reasonable cause and delay is also for 60 days, hence prayed to condone the delay and remit the appeal back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. In reply, the ld.Addl. CIT-DR stated that the cause deliberated by the ld.AR does not seem to be supported by any evidence and also it is a make believe story and hence, it should not be accepted. 4. After hearing rival contentions and going through the fact that the delay is of 60 days and the assessee claims that the Manager Accounts, who was entrusted in filing of appeal went on leave on account of medical exigency. 5. We are of the considered view that going through the reasons for delay of 60 days and to meet the interest of justice, we are inclined to condone the delay before the CIT(A)-NFAC and the order of the CIT(A)-NFAC is set aside and matter is remanded back to his file for fresh adjudication on merits after allowing 3 ITA No. 2477 /Chny/2024 reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 25th day of November, 2024 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (मनोज क ुमार अŤवाल) (मनु क ुमार िगįर) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) लेखा सद˟ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (MANU KUMAR GIRI) Ɋाियक सद˟ / JUDICIAL MEMBER चेɄई Chennai: िदनांक Dated : 25-11-2024 KV आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत /Copy to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem. 4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध/DR 5. गाडŊफाईल/GF "