SC: Clarificatory Statement Does Not Constitute a Binding Undertaking for Contempt Proceedings  ||  Supreme Court: Litigant Cannot be Worse Off for Filing an Appeal under ‘No Reformatio in Peius’  ||  Orissa HC: Article 22(1) Arrest Rights Pre-Exist, Written Grounds Ruling Not Prospective  ||  Kerala HC: Kissing a Child’s Penis Constitutes Penetrative Sexual Assault under POCSO  ||  Madras HC: Married Daughter Cannot be Denied Compassionate Appointment Solely for Her Marriage  ||  Bombay High Court: Child Welfare Prevails as ‘Joint Parenting’ is Not Recognised in Indian Law  ||  Kerala HC: Minor’s Consent or Relationship with Accused Holds No Relevance under POCSO Act  ||  Bombay HC: Failure to Prove Exact Quantum of Loss Does Not Bar Compensation  ||  CCPA Fines Dial4Trade Rs. 10 Lakh for Online Ammonium Nitrate Listing Featuring Blast Images  ||  Supreme Court: Multiple Cases Alone Cannot Justify an Externment Order    

M/S. Jay Gee Overseas P. Ltd., vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi - (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) (29 Jan 2021)

Multiple matrimonial/penal proceedings launched by daughter-in- law against Assessee's entire family is a sufficient reason beyond assessee’s control and sufficient to condone the delay

MANU/ID/0066/2021

Limitation

Appellant by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Delhi qua the assessment year 2012-13 on the grounds that the order passed by the CIT (A) is bad in law and against the principle of natural justice. Further, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT (A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal.

Assessing Officer (AO) during scrutiny proceedings noticed that, the assessee while computing the total income claimed deduction qua the expenditure incurred in relation to the income which does not form part of the total income and consequently, proceeded to invoke the provisions contained under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (IT Act) and thereby made disallowance of Rs.73,703. AO also made addition of Rs.3,38,852 on account of cessation of liability qua the amount due towards sundry creditors on failure of the assessee to furnish any proof to support that liability still exists during the year under assessment.

Assessee carried the matter before the learned CIT (A) by way of filing the appeal who has confirmed the same after dismissing the appeal in limine. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the learned CIT (A), the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal.

Bare perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) goes to show that, the appeal before the learned CIT (A) was filed with delay of 480 days. Learned CIT (A) has declined to condone the delay by dismissing the appeal in limine. Assessee put forth divorce/ matrimonial/penal proceedings filed by his daughter-in-law against the entire family which have not been accepted by the learned CIT (A) and dismissed the appeal in limine. Multiple matrimonial/penal proceedings launched by the daughter-in- law against the assessee's entire family is a sufficient reason beyond the control of the assessee and sufficient to condone the delay. Hence, CIT (A) has erred in not condoning the delay. CIT(A) is directed to dispose of the appeal on merit, after providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Tags : ASSESSMENT   ADDITIONS   DELAY   CONDONATION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved