CHANNAPATNA PUTTASWAMY RAMAYARANI,MANDYA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, MANDYA

ITA 1682/BANG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri. Guru Sajjan against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], which dismissed his appeal in limine for not being filed within the prescribed time. The original assessment order was passed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on 19.03.2024, and the appeal was filed on 11.04.2024. The CIT(A) erroneously noted the date of the assessment order as 13.10.2023, leading to the dismissal of the appeal for being filed late. The Tribunal found that the appeal was indeed filed within the correct timeframe and directed the FAA to reconsider the case on its merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470761 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 10-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 30-08-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PRATHIBHA R
• Section: 147; 144; 142(1); 250

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC - C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT R ITA No.1794/Bang/2024 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shri. Guru Sajjan, Guru Sannappa Sajjn 76 4 5 to 478 and Other H, Babaleshwar, Bijapur – 586 113. PAN : EAPPS 7300 C Vs. ITO, Ward – 1 & TPS, Bijapur. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Smt. Prathibha R, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department. Date of hearing : 21.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 21.10.2024 O R D E R Per George George K, Vice President: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the Order of CIT(A) dated 05.08.2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2015-16. 2. At the very outset, we notice that CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte Order dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limine without condoning the delay (if any) in filing the appeal before him. The relevant finding of the CIT(A) reads as follows: “3. It is clear from the above that the order u/s 147 r.w.s 144 was made on 13.10.2023 which got served upon the appellant on 13.10.2023 but the ITA No.1794/Bang/2024 Page 2 of 3 appeal was filed on 11.04.2024 i.e. beyond prescribed time of 30 days, whereas, the appellant was required to file appeal within 30 days as provided vide section 249(2) on receipt of order u/s 147 r.w,s 144. Further, the contention of the appellant regarding delay in filing of appeal is without any substance in it. The appellant was required to file appeal within 30days of the receipt of demand notice. However, the appellant has not done so. Hence, the reason stated can't be relied upon and therefore, as provided in the section 249(3) of the IT Act. Accordingly, 1 am not satisfied that the appellate had sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the specified period. Hence, since, appeal was not filed within prescribed time as provided in the section 249(2) of the IT Act, the same is not admitted. 4. In view of the above facts, the appeal is dismissed for statistical purpose and not required to be adjudicated on merits.” 3. The learned AR submitted that assessee had filed the appeal on time. It was submitted that Assessment Order was passed on 19.03.2024 and appeal was instituted before the First Appellate Authority (FAA) on 11.04.2024. It was submitted that assessee had committed a mistake in mentioning the date of Assessment Order as 13.10.2023. It was submitted that the date 13.10.2023 is the date on which the notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued. Therefore, it was contended that CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limine without adjudicating on merits. 4. The learned Standing Counsel was duly heard. 5. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Admittedly, in this case, the Assessment Order has been passed on 19.03.2024 under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act. The appeal has been filed on 11.04.2024 i.e., well within the time prescribed under section 249(2) of the Act. Therefore, the CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal in limine without adjudicating on merits. Hence, the issues raised in this appeal are restored to the files of the FAA. ITA No.1794/Bang/2024 Page 3 of 3 The CIT(A) is directed the adjudicate the issues on merits. It is ordered accordingly. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (PADMAVATHY S) (GEORGE GEORGE K) Accountant Member Vice President Bangalore. Dated: 21.10.2024. /NS/* Copy to: 1. Appellants 2. Respondent 3. DRP 4. CIT 5. CIT(A) 6. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 7. Guard file By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore. "