SHREE TRIVENI FOODS,PARWANOO V. ITO PARWANOO, PARWANOO

ITA 682/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Triveni Foods, who appealed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi, concerning the Assessment Year 2009-10. The primary issue was the misdirection by the Ld. CIT(A), who treated the appeal as related to a penalty order rather than a quantum assessment order. The assessee argued that this misdirection vitiated the appellate proceedings, especially since the penalty had been settled separately under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2022. The Tribunal found that the appeal was wrongly dismissed by linking it to the penalty order and thus restored it for proper consideration.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772006 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
• Laws Referred To: Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024, Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471)
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RANJIT KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: SURINDER BABBAR; C.A
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCHES, “SMC” CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 682 /Chd/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Triveni Foods Sector-6, Parwanoo Himachal Pradesh-173220 बनाम The ITO Parwanoo ˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AANFS4378J अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent िनधाᭅᳯरती कᳱ ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Surinder Babbar, C.A राज᭭व कᳱ ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25/08/2025 उदघोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 25/08/2025 आदेश/Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi, dated. 21/09/2022 pertaining to Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. At the outset, it was pointed out that there is a delay of 900 days in filing of the present appeal before the Tribunal. 3. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had never been served with the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and, therefore, he was under the bona fide belief that the appeal was still pending adjudication before the Ld. CIT(A). It was only when the assessee filed an application under the “Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024” (VSVS), that he came to know that the appeal had already been dismissed. It was submitted that the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional but occurred on account of circumstances beyond the assessee’s control. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471) to contend that a liberal approach should be taken in matters of condonation. Printed from counselvise.com 2 4. The Ld. DR on the other hand, opposed the condonation of delay and submitted that the assessee did not establish sufficient cause. However, she fairly left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. 5. I have considered the rival submissions and, in view of the facts on record as well as judicial principles, I am satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time on account of the peculiar facts of the present case, as captured herein below. Accordingly, the delay is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 6. On merits of the case, the Ld. AR submitted that the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was filed against the quantum assessment order. However, while disposing of the matter, the Ld. CIT(A) misdirected himself by treating the appeal as one arising out of the penalty order. It was submitted that the assessee had already settled the penalty proceedings separately under the VSVS, 2022. Thus, there was no occasion to treat the appeal in relation to the penalty. The Ld. AR argued that such misdirection vitiated the appellate proceedings. They prayed that the appeal be restored to its original place and number so that the assessee’s application filed under the VSVS, 2024, in respect of the quantum dispute may be processed by the Revenue in accordance with law. 7. Per contra, the Ld. DR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). She submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal after considering the available records and the assessee cannot now seek to reopen the proceedings. However, she conceded that if the Tribunal were to hold that the assessee’s appeal was wrongly dismissed by linking it to the penalty order, then appropriate directions may be issued for fresh consideration by the CIT(A). 8. I have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the record. It is not in dispute that the assessee had filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the quantum assessment order. However, the Ld. CIT(A), by misdirecting Printed from counselvise.com 3 himself, proceeded on the premise that the appeal related to the penalty order and dismissed it. 8.1 As the appeal was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) on a wrong footing, I hold that for all practical purposes the appeal deserves to be restored to its original place and number. 8.2 Consequent to the restoration of the appeal, I also deem it appropriate to direct the Revenue to process the assessee’s application filed under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024, strictly in accordance with law, treating the restored appeal as one arising from the quantum assessment order. 9. In view of the foregoing, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside, and the matter is restored to its original place and number before the Ld. CIT(A) for being dealt with in accordance with the law. The Revenue is free to process the assessee’s VSVS application filed in 2024, if permissible in law, in light of such restoration. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open Court on 25/08/2025) Sd/- ( LALIET KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER AG Date: 25/08/2025 आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ/ The Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुᲦ/ CIT 4. आयकर आयुᲦ (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च᭛डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाडŊ फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "