SUSHIL MANOHAR AGARKAR, MUMBAI V. ITO 23(1) (3), MUMBAI

ITA 1741/MUM/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9262 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 30-09-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E ‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1741/Mum/2021 (Asse ssment Year :2011-12) Shri Sushil Manohar Agarkar 1306, PIL Heights, Eden Park, Indralok Phase-6, Bhayander East Maharashtra-401 105 Vs. ITO-23(1)(3) Mumbai PAN/GIR No.ADPPA7262A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Prateek Jha & Shri Prayag Jha Revenue by Shri B.K. Bagchi Date of Hearing 06/06/2022 Date of Pronouncement 08/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No.1741/Mum/2021 for A.Y.2011-12 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1034652298(1) dated 05/08/2021 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 24/03/2014 by the ld. ITO-23(1)(3), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO). ITA No.1741/Mum/2021 Shri Sushil Manohar Agarkar 2 2. At the outset, we find that the ld. CIT(A) had not condoned the delay of 24days in filing of appeal by the assessee before him. We find that the assessee had challenged this action vide Ground No.1 before us. We find that assessee had also filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay of 24 days. In these circumstances, we deem it fit and appropriate to remand this appeal to the file of ld CIT(A) with a direction to condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal denovo, in accordance with law. Accordingly, the Ground No.1 raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 3. The other grounds raised by the assessee are also remanded back to ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of the issues on merits in accordance with law. The assessee is at liberty to furnish fresh evidences, if any, in support of his contentions, before the ld. CIT(A). 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 08/06/2022 by way of proper mentioning in the notice board. Sd/- (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) Sd/- (M.BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 08/06/2022 KARUNA, sr.ps ITA No.1741/Mum/2021 Shri Sushil Manohar Agarkar 3 Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), Mumbai. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. //True Copy//