SMT DAIDEVI JUGRAJJI CHARITABLE TRUST, SALEM V. THE ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD, SALEM

ITA 110/CHNY/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Daidevi Jugrajji Charitable Trust appealing against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which dismissed their appeal in limine due to a delay in filing. The original intimation under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was issued by the CPC, Bengaluru, on 11.10.2016, and the assessee received it on 24.12.2016. The appeal to the CIT(A) was filed on 05.02.2020, significantly later than the 30-day period allowed. The assessee attributed the delay to the managing trustee's age and lack of literacy, and the departure of their Chartered Accountant. However, both the CIT(A) and the tribunal found these reasons insufficient to justify such a prolonged delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 135074 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 07-03-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(1)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी/एस एम सी’’ यायपीठ, चे ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C/SMC’ BENCH: CHENNAI ी महावीर सह, उपा य के सम BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.110/Chny/2023 िनधा रण वष /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Smt. Daidevi Jugrajji Charitable Trust, 221, Main Road, Shevapet, Salem – 636 002. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward, Salem. [PAN: AAKTS-5369-L] ( अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) अपीलाथ क ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri D. Anand, Advocate यथ क ओर से /Respondent by : Shri S. Chandrasekaran, JCIT सुनवाई क तारीख/Date of Hearing : 08.03.2023 घोषणा क तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 08.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [CIT(A)] in Appeal No.CIT(A), Salem/11579/2019-20 dated 19-01-2023. The return of income was processed and intimation u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) was issued by the Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru for the assessment year 2014-15 vide order dated 11.10.2016. ITA No.110/Chny/2023 :- 2 -: 2. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) in not condoning the delay and dismissing the appeal in limine. The brief facts of the case are that the relevant A.Y is 2014-15 and addition made by CPC, Bengaluru while computing the taxable income u/s. 143(1) of the Act was Rs. 3,32,648/-. From the perusal of Form No.35, the CIT(A) noted that the intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act was passed by CPC, Bengaluru on 11.10.2016 and the order was served on assessee on 24.12.2016. The appeal has to be filed within 30 days that is to be allowed on or before 10.11.2016 before CIT(A), but actually the appeal was filed before CIT(A) on 05.02.2020 and thereby, there is a delay of 1182 days. The reasons stated by assessee before CIT(A) reads as under: "Your appellants trust submits that there is a delay of 36 months in filing the said appeal before the Honorable authority. The Managing Trustee a septuagenarian is semiliterate and could not follow what was written in English 143(1) order. During this period the Charted Accountant who was engaged in request in the case left midway along with the part time accountant. The delay is submitted is not wilful and was beyond the control of your appellant petitioner. The delay is not condoned the petitioner trust will be put to great financial loss. And therefore prays to meet the ends of justice the delay may be condoned and justice rendered." 3. The CIT(A) by going through the reasons noted that the assessee could not show any cogent reason for belatedly filing the appeal and hence, he dismissed the appeal in limine as un-admitted. Aggrieved, the assessee came in appeal before the Tribunal. ITA No.110/Chny/2023 :- 3 -: 4. Before me, the Ld. counsel for the assessee only reiterated the same submissions as made before CIT(A) and filed certain case laws, but could not explain any reason as to how the delay has occurred. Even the simple cause he could not explain before me. On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. D.R heavily opposed the condonation of delay and he argued that this long delay of 1182 days cannot be condoned without any reason. 5. After hearing the rival contentions, I am of the view that since the assessee could not adduce any reasonable cause for condonation of this long delay of 1182 days, I am constrained to dismiss this appeal. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 08 th of March, 2023. Sd/- (महावीर िसंह) (Mahavir Singh) उपा / Vice President चे ई/Chennai, दनांक/Dated: 08-03-2023 EDN/- आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. थ /Respondent 3. आयकर आयु /CIT 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड फाईल/GF