GETSETDO ENTERPRISES,MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

ITA 547/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves GetSetDo Enterprises appealing against an order from the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which had dismissed their appeal due to delay in filing. The delay occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the assessee argued that they were unable to access necessary records due to their Chartered Accountant relocating and the ongoing pandemic. The Tribunal noted that the Supreme Court had extended the period of limitation during the pandemic, which was not considered by the CIT(A) in their decision. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits, acknowledging the procedural oversight regarding the delay in filing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26584 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHANGEPATIL PUSHKARAJ
• Assessee Lawyers: VIDHAN CHOUDHARY
• Keywords: Period of limitation
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘G’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 547/MUM/2025 (Assessment Year : 2018–19) GetSetDo Enterprises F-602, 6th Floor, Emerald Regency Tower, Near Swastik Residential, 400607. Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 22(1)(6), Piramal Chamber, 400012. PAN/GIR No. AARFG7819E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri. Vidhan Choudhary Revenue by Shri. Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 27/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement 28/03/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (A.M): This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 28.11.2024 passed in Appeal no. NFAC/2017- 18/10077161 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income– tax(Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”] u/s. 250 of the Income- Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as \"Act\"] for the Assessment year [A.Y.] 2018-19. ITA no. 547/MUM/2025 Getsetdo Enterprises 2 2. During the course of hearing, the ld AR submitted that the quantum proceedings for Assessment Year 2018-19 were initiated during the COVID-19 period, and unfortunately, they do not have access to any relevant records. This is due to the fact that the Chartered Accountant who was previously handling the matter has relocated to Madhya Pradesh, leaving them without any details, information, or status of the quantum appeal. Notably, the quantum appeal forms the basis of the present penalty appeal, which was also decided ex parte by the Assessing Officer and also by the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). It was submitted that they are in the process of appointing a Chartered Accountant firm to represent them in the subject appeal. However, in order to trace the necessary papers and ascertain the current status of the quantum appeal, additional time is required. Accordingly, it was requested to grant an adjournment of at least two months to facilitate the retrieval of relevant records and preparation of the case. 3. The ld DR was also heard who has fairly submitted that the appeal has been decided ex-parte qua the assessee. 4. Heard both the parties and pursued the material available on record. On persual of the impugned order, it is noted that the appeal so filed by the assessee was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) on account of delay in filing the appeal. It is also noted that the assessment order was passed on 19.10.2021 and the assessee ITA no. 547/MUM/2025 Getsetdo Enterprises 3 had filed the appeal on 18.01.2022 and the period of delay therefore falls under the COVID-19 pandemic where in the period of limitation has been extended by the Hon'ble Supreme court and the Benches across the Tribunal following the same have either admitted the appeals or have directed the admittance of appeals. Therefore, in the instant case, apparently the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to take into consideration the extension of limitation so directed by the Hon'ble Supreme court and in light of the same, the delay is hereby condoned in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 5. Further, given that the appeal has been decided ex-parte qua the assessee and has not been decided on the merits of the case, no useful purpose would be served in adjourning the matter any further and we deem it appropriate to remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh as per law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 28.03.2025. Sd/- (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) Sd/- (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no. 547/MUM/2025 Getsetdo Enterprises 4 Mumbai; Dated 28/03/2025 Anandi Nambi, Steno Copy of the Order forwarded to: BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// "