RAHUL KHONGSIT,SHILLONG V. ITO, WARD-2, SHILLONG

ITA 71/GTY/2024

AI Insights

This case involves appeals by the revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The appeals were initially dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) in limine on the grounds of being barred by limitation as per Section 250(3) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee's counsel argued that the period of delay was covered by a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court, which excluded the COVID period while calculating the limitation period. The tribunal agreed with the assessee's counsel, noting that the delay in filing the appeals fell within the excluded COVID period, and thus restored the appeals for a decision on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 473757 (ITAT-GUWAHATI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 18-09-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 12-04-2024
• Laws Referred To: Section 250(3)
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Time period of passing order

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “GAUHATI” BENCH: GUWAHATI (THROUGH HYBRID HEARING) Įी राजेश क ुमार, लेखा सटèय एवं Įी मनोमोहन दास, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial Member] I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit, Shillong (PAN: BJDPK 4248 M) Vs. NEAC, Delhi Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent /(Ĥ×यथȸ) Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 18.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 21.10.2024 For the Appellant/ Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Kishore Jain, FCA For the Respondent/ राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri Soumendu Sekhar Das, JCIT ORDER / आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is the appeal preferred by the revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)”] for the AY 2018-19. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee Mr. Kishore Jain, CA submitted by referring to the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) that these appeals were 2 I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit dismissed in liminie on the ground of being barred by limitation in terms of Section 250(3) without deciding these appeals on merits. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there is no delay in filing these appeals as the period of delay is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court which excluded the COVID period while calculating limitation period and therefore, these appeals were deemed to have been filed within time as per the limitation provided under the Act. The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that these appeals may be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same on merit after affording the reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 3. The Ld. D.R on the other hand relied on the appellate order. 4. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that as per the information/records available before us the delay in filing the appeals fall within the COVID period which has been excluded by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court from the limitation period. Therefore, the action of Ld. CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal in liminie on the ground of being barred by limitation is not sustainable under the Act. Accordingly, we restore these appeals to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the same on merit after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 21st October, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (Manomohan Das /मनोमोहन दास) (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ुमार) Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Dated: 21st October, 2024 SM, Sr. PS 3 I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Rahul Khongsit, P K Warbah Complex, Shillong, Meghalaya- 793001. 2. Respondent- NEAC, Delhi 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr. CIT- , Guwahati 5. DR, Gauhati Bench, Guwahati True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “GAUHATI” BENCH: GUWAHATI (THROUGH HYBRID HEARING) Įी राजेश क ुमार, लेखा सटèय एवं Įी मनोमोहन दास, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial Member] I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit, Shillong (PAN: BJDPK 4248 M) Vs. NEAC, Delhi Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent /(Ĥ×यथȸ) Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 18.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 21.10.2024 For the Appellant/ Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Kishore Jain, FCA For the Respondent/ राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri Soumendu Sekhar Das, JCIT ORDER / आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is the appeal preferred by the revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)”] for the AY 2018-19. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee Mr. Kishore Jain, CA submitted by referring to the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) that these appeals were 2 I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit dismissed in liminie on the ground of being barred by limitation in terms of Section 250(3) without deciding these appeals on merits. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there is no delay in filing these appeals as the period of delay is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court which excluded the COVID period while calculating limitation period and therefore, these appeals were deemed to have been filed within time as per the limitation provided under the Act. The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that these appeals may be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same on merit after affording the reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 3. The Ld. D.R on the other hand relied on the appellate order. 4. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that as per the information/records available before us the delay in filing the appeals fall within the COVID period which has been excluded by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court from the limitation period. Therefore, the action of Ld. CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal in liminie on the ground of being barred by limitation is not sustainable under the Act. Accordingly, we restore these appeals to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the same on merit after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 21st October, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (Manomohan Das /मनोमोहन दास) (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ुमार) Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Dated: 21st October, 2024 SM, Sr. PS 3 I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Rahul Khongsit, P K Warbah Complex, Shillong, Meghalaya- 793001. 2. Respondent- NEAC, Delhi 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr. CIT- , Guwahati 5. DR, Gauhati Bench, Guwahati True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “GAUHATI” BENCH: GUWAHATI (THROUGH HYBRID HEARING) Įी राजेश क ुमार, लेखा सटèय एवं Įी मनोमोहन दास, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial Member] I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit, Shillong (PAN: BJDPK 4248 M) Vs. NEAC, Delhi Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent /(Ĥ×यथȸ) Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 18.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 21.10.2024 For the Appellant/ Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Kishore Jain, FCA For the Respondent/ राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri Soumendu Sekhar Das, JCIT ORDER / आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is the appeal preferred by the revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)”] for the AY 2018-19. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee Mr. Kishore Jain, CA submitted by referring to the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) that these appeals were 2 I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit dismissed in liminie on the ground of being barred by limitation in terms of Section 250(3) without deciding these appeals on merits. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there is no delay in filing these appeals as the period of delay is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court which excluded the COVID period while calculating limitation period and therefore, these appeals were deemed to have been filed within time as per the limitation provided under the Act. The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that these appeals may be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same on merit after affording the reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 3. The Ld. D.R on the other hand relied on the appellate order. 4. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that as per the information/records available before us the delay in filing the appeals fall within the COVID period which has been excluded by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court from the limitation period. Therefore, the action of Ld. CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal in liminie on the ground of being barred by limitation is not sustainable under the Act. Accordingly, we restore these appeals to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the same on merit after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 21st October, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (Manomohan Das /मनोमोहन दास) (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ुमार) Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Dated: 21st October, 2024 SM, Sr. PS 3 I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Rahul Khongsit, P K Warbah Complex, Shillong, Meghalaya- 793001. 2. Respondent- NEAC, Delhi 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr. CIT- , Guwahati 5. DR, Gauhati Bench, Guwahati True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “GAUHATI” BENCH: GUWAHATI (THROUGH HYBRID HEARING) Įी राजेश क ुमार, लेखा सटèय एवं Įी मनोमोहन दास, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial Member] I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit, Shillong (PAN: BJDPK 4248 M) Vs. NEAC, Delhi Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent /(Ĥ×यथȸ) Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 18.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 21.10.2024 For the Appellant/ Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Kishore Jain, FCA For the Respondent/ राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri Soumendu Sekhar Das, JCIT ORDER / आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is the appeal preferred by the revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)”] for the AY 2018-19. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee Mr. Kishore Jain, CA submitted by referring to the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) that these appeals were 2 I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit dismissed in liminie on the ground of being barred by limitation in terms of Section 250(3) without deciding these appeals on merits. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there is no delay in filing these appeals as the period of delay is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court which excluded the COVID period while calculating limitation period and therefore, these appeals were deemed to have been filed within time as per the limitation provided under the Act. The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that these appeals may be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same on merit after affording the reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 3. The Ld. D.R on the other hand relied on the appellate order. 4. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that as per the information/records available before us the delay in filing the appeals fall within the COVID period which has been excluded by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court from the limitation period. Therefore, the action of Ld. CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal in liminie on the ground of being barred by limitation is not sustainable under the Act. Accordingly, we restore these appeals to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the same on merit after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 21st October, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (Manomohan Das /मनोमोहन दास) (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ुमार) Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Dated: 21st October, 2024 SM, Sr. PS 3 I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Rahul Khongsit, P K Warbah Complex, Shillong, Meghalaya- 793001. 2. Respondent- NEAC, Delhi 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr. CIT- , Guwahati 5. DR, Gauhati Bench, Guwahati True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “GAUHATI” BENCH: GUWAHATI (THROUGH HYBRID HEARING) Įी राजेश क ुमार, लेखा सटèय एवं Įी मनोमोहन दास, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial Member] I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit, Shillong (PAN: BJDPK 4248 M) Vs. NEAC, Delhi Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent /(Ĥ×यथȸ) Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 18.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 21.10.2024 For the Appellant/ Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Kishore Jain, FCA For the Respondent/ राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri Soumendu Sekhar Das, JCIT ORDER / आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is the appeal preferred by the revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)”] for the AY 2018-19. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee Mr. Kishore Jain, CA submitted by referring to the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) that these appeals were 2 I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit dismissed in liminie on the ground of being barred by limitation in terms of Section 250(3) without deciding these appeals on merits. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there is no delay in filing these appeals as the period of delay is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court which excluded the COVID period while calculating limitation period and therefore, these appeals were deemed to have been filed within time as per the limitation provided under the Act. The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that these appeals may be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same on merit after affording the reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 3. The Ld. D.R on the other hand relied on the appellate order. 4. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that as per the information/records available before us the delay in filing the appeals fall within the COVID period which has been excluded by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court from the limitation period. Therefore, the action of Ld. CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal in liminie on the ground of being barred by limitation is not sustainable under the Act. Accordingly, we restore these appeals to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the same on merit after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 21st October, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (Manomohan Das /मनोमोहन दास) (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ुमार) Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Dated: 21st October, 2024 SM, Sr. PS 3 I.T.A. Nos. 65 & 71/Gau/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rahul Khongsit Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Rahul Khongsit, P K Warbah Complex, Shillong, Meghalaya- 793001. 2. Respondent- NEAC, Delhi 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr. CIT- , Guwahati 5. DR, Gauhati Bench, Guwahati True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "