INAYAT NAJMUDDIN BHARMAL,CHENNAI V. ITO, NON CORP WARD 1(2), CHENNAI

ITA 2206/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Inayat Najmuddin Bharmal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi, for the assessment year 2015-16. The appeal was initially dismissed due to being filed late without justified grounds. The assessee argued that the delay was caused by the demise of their chartered accountant. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's plea, noting that the delay was minimal and justified. Furthermore, the Tribunal considered the Supreme Court's decision in Rajiv Bansal, which impacted the authority of the Assessing Officer to initiate proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case for a fresh decision on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 46384 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 24-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 20-08-2024
• Other Referred Cases: Rajiv Bansal vs. Unknown
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHINTHAPALLI MEHER CHAND
• Assessee Lawyers: NARESH SINGH RATHORE; C.A
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 147; 143(3)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘ए’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिर्क सदस्य एवं श्री अयिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य क े समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.2206/Chny/2024 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2015-16 Inayat Najmuddin Bharmal No.15, III Main Road, East Abhiramapuram, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. [PAN: AABPB7896A] Income Tax Officer, Non-Corp. Ward-1(2) Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Naresh Singh Rathore, C.A प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent by : Shri Chinthapalli Meher Chand, JCIT सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 24.10.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.10.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M : This appeal is filed against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1065635516(1) dated 13.06.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2015- 16. Through the aforesaid appeal the assesse has challenged order u/s 250 dated 13.06.2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi. ITA No.2206/Chny/2024 :- 2 -: 2.0 At the outset the Ld. Counsel for the assesse informed that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has passed an ex-parte order thereby confirming the assessment order u/s 147 r.w. 143(3) dated 11.12.2021 and that the appeal was dismissed for being filed late without any justified grounds. It was pleaded that the assesse had committed delay of just 7 days and for which it had justified grounds. It was stated that the chartered account initially engaged by the assesse demised as a result the delay happened. The Ld. Counsel informed that its case is fully covered by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rajiv Bansal dated 04.10.2024 which means that the AO did not have any authority to initiate the impugned proceedings u/s 148. The Ld. Counsel submitted the matter may be restored to Ld. CIT(A) for readjudication on its merits and that it shall make full compliance to the notices of Ld. CIT(A). In support of its contentions, the Ld. Counsel filed a detailed paperbook. The Ld. DR on the other hand by way of his written submissions submitted that the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rajiv Bansal dated 04.10.2024 is not applicable in this case. ITA No.2206/Chny/2024 :- 3 -: 3.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. It is trite law that no litigant benefits by non- prosecution of its case. We find sufficient force in the pleadings of the assesse as to why it could not file its appeal in time. We have also noted that apart from merely harping on the issue of delayed filing by the assesse the Ld. CIT(A) has not touched upon merits of the case. 4.0 We are therefore of the view that ends of justice would be met if the case is set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for readjudication after giving opportunities of being heard to the assesse and to pass a speaking order. We also direct the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay of 7 days in filing of appeal in this case. He will be at liberty to call for any remand report from the Ld. AO if warranted by the facts of the case. The assesse shall be bound to comply to all the notices and details called by the Ld. CIT(A). Any non-compliance from the assesse side shall be adversely viewed. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld. First Appellate Authority and direct him to readjudicate the matter de novo. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.2206/Chny/2024 :- 4 -: 5.0 In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 25th, October-2024 at Chennai. Sd/- ( एबी टी. वकी) (ABY T VARKEY) न्याधयक सदस्य / Judicial Member Sd/- (अयिताभ शुक्ला) (AMITABH SHUKLA) लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, धदिांक/Dated: 25th , October-2024. KB/- आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to: 1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Chennai 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR 5. गार्ड फाईि/GF "