MAA HARSIDHHI INFRA DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR V. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

ITA 348/RPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Maa Harsiddhi Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting an order from the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur, for the assessment year 2018-19. The initial appeal was against an order under section 143(1) dated 16.10.2019. However, a subsequent order under section 143(3) dated 13.03.2021 was passed, which upheld the additions made in the assessment. The CIT(Appeals)/NFAC dismissed the appeal as infructuous, noting that the order under section 143(1) does not remain valid post the issuance of an order under section 143(3). The Tribunal agreed with this finding, citing that the earlier intimation under section 143(1) gets subsumed in the subsequent assessment under section 143(3).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 668593 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Other Referred Cases: Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA PATEL
• Assessee Lawyers: G.S. AGRAWAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण Ûयायपीठ रायपुर मɅ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.348/RPR/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Maa Harsiddhi Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. S-6 & Part of S-7, 2nd floor, Block E, L.K Corporate Tower, Dhamtari Road, Dumurtarai, Raipur (C.G.)-490 215 PAN: AAGCM7052H ........अपीलाथȸ / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……Ĥ×यथȸ / Respondent Assessee by : Shri G.S. Agrawal, CA Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing : 20.06.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख / Date of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025 2 Maa Harsiddhi Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur ITA No. 348/RPR/2025 आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: The captioned appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, dated 07.02.2025 for the assessment year 2018-19 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the appeal is time barred by 27 days. Elaborating the reasons leading to the said delay, the Ld. Counsel has filed condonation petition a/w. affidavit. 3. The Ld. Sr. DR did not file any counter affidavit for objecting the condonation of delay nor could place on record any evidence to suggest that such delay has been caused due to deliberate conduct of the assessee. 4. After perusing the condonation petition a/w. affidavit, we are of the considered view that the reasons for such delay were absolutely circumstancial and they are not in any way attributing any malafide or deliberate conduct of the assessee, if any for causing such delay. At the same time a liberal and judicious approach must be adopted also relying on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Civil Appeal Nos……………../2025 [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 26310- 3 Maa Harsiddhi Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur ITA No. 348/RPR/2025 26311/2024, dated 31.01.2025 and Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025. 5. Coming to the merits of the matter, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC held and observed as follows: “Decision: - Here the assessee has filed appeal against order u/s.143(1) dated 16.10.2019 pertaining to A.Y.2018-19. However, on perusal of the submissions and the details on record, it is gathered that the order u/s.143(3) dated 13.03.2021 was also passed and further CIT(A) order was also passed wherein additions made in assessment order were upheld. Since the order u/s.143(3) has been passed, the order u/s.143(1) does not remain valid and moreover the appeal order has also been passed. Therefore, assessee has wrongly filed the appeal and misleading if done intentionally) the department. Hence, technically the present appeal becomes infructuous and accordingly the same is dismissed.” 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee could not refute the aforesaid facts on record and it is a matter of common knowledge that once the assessment was framed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) then earlier intimation issued u/s.143(1) of the Act gets subsumed in the said subsequent assessment. This fact is admitted by the Ld. Sr. DR. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC which is upheld. 7. As per the above terms grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed. 4 Maa Harsiddhi Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur ITA No. 348/RPR/2025 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 25th day of June, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- ARUN KHODPIA PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) रायपुर/ RAIPUR ; Ǒदनांक / Dated : 25th June, 2025. SB, Sr. PS आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ /The Appellant. 2. Ĥ×यथȸ /The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT-1, Raipur (C.G.) 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर बɅच, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, Raipur Bench, Raipur. 5. गाड[ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur. "