SWARGIYA PROF NAWAL PD. SINGH S SANSTHAN,VAISHALI V. CPC, BENGALURU

ITA 348/PAT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Swargiya Prof Nawal Pd. Singh S Sansthan, the appellant, who contested an order from the CIT, Appeal ADDL/JCIT(A)-3, Chennai, which dismissed their appeal due to a significant delay in filing (1,489 days). The original dispute arose from the CPC, Bengaluru's intimation under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which disallowed the assessee's claim of exemption of \\u20b9;1,25,99,176, representing 80% of total expenditure against total receipts. The Tribunal found sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal and admitted the case for adjudication on merits, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 781239 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 23-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.348/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Swargiya Prof Nawal Pd. Singh S Sansthan…………………..………. …………………....Appellant 0 Sahi Colony, Hajipur, Vaishali, Bihar- 844101.. [PAN: AAGTS5236E] vs. CPC, Bengaluru……..…....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Rakesh Kumar, Adv., appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : October 16, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : October 21, 2025 आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal is directed by the assessee against the order dated 03.01.2025 passed by the CIT, Appeal ADDL/JCIT(A)-3, Chennai under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2018–19. The case was processed by the CPC, which issued an intimation under section 143(1) of the Act, disallowing the assessee’s claim of exemption of ₹1,25,99,176, being 80% of the total expenditure against total receipts of ₹1,27,78,294. Consequently, the total income was determined at ₹₹1,27,78,294. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.348/Pat/2025 Swargiya Prof Nawal Pd. Singh S Sansthan 2 3. Aggrieved by the above intimation, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). However, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the ground that it was filed after a delay of 1,489 days, without considering the matter on merits. 4. The assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal against the order of the ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 112 days in filing the appeal. In this connection, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay, explaining the reasons for such delay. We, after considering the submissions of the assessee and the material placed on record, we find that there exists sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the delay of 112 days is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merit 5. Before us, it was submitted that the delay was unintentional before the Ld. CIT (A) and occurred due to bona fide reasons, and now the assessee has ready to filed an application for condonation of delay. The learned DR did not raise any serious objection to the restoration of the matter for adjudication on merits before Ld. CIT(A) 6. We, after hearing both sides and perusing the material on record, we find that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without affording an opportunity to the assessee to explain the delay or to consider the issue on merits. We are of the considered view that, in the interest of justice, the matter should be restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction that the assessee shall file an appropriate application explaining the reasons for delay of 1,489 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) shall consider the assessee’s application for condonation of delay in Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.348/Pat/2025 Swargiya Prof Nawal Pd. Singh S Sansthan 3 accordance with law, and if satisfied, shall decide the appeal on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7. In view of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 21st October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] लेखा सदèय/Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय/Judicial Member Dated: 21.10.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3.CIT (A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "