Report on Lack of AC, Drinking Water and WiFi at DU Law Faculty Sought by Delhi High Court  ||  All. HC: DCP Pulled Up for Directing Further Investigation Without Leave of the Magistrate  ||  Kerala HC: Husband Acquitted u/s 304B IPC Can be Held Guilty u/s 498A IPC if Facts Permit  ||  Karnataka Prohibition of Violence Against Advocates Act, 2023 Comes Into Effect From 10th June, 2024  ||  Karnataka HC: PIL Seeking Declaration that Temples are Not Public Authorities, Dismissed  ||  Bom. HC: Karan Johar Files Suit Against Makers of the Film “Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar”  ||  Mad. HC: Bar Associations to Pay 15000 to 20,000 to Junior Lawyers Practicing in State  ||  Kerala High Court: E-Toilets to be Build for Flood Affected Tribal Families  ||  Amalgamation of Air Asia With Air India Express Approved by NCLT  ||  SC: Accused Refusing to Undergo Medical Examination Amounts to Non-Cooperation With Investigation    

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 2024 - All Rights Reserved