Appeal delay excused for negligence, tax liability raised under Income-tax Act, appeal allowed for statistical purposes. The delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal was condoned due to the negligence of the previous legal counsel, with the Tribunal admitting the ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Appeal delay excused for negligence, tax liability raised under Income-tax Act, appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
The delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal was condoned due to the negligence of the previous legal counsel, with the Tribunal admitting the appeal. Regarding the non-deduction of tax on payments made, the assessee's liability under section 201(1) of the Income-tax Act was raised, but the matter was set aside for verification if payees had included the receipts in their incomes. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.
Issues involved: Delay in filing appeal before Tribunal, Non-deduction of tax on payments made.
Delay in filing appeal before Tribunal: The appeal by the assessee was delayed by 211 days due to the negligence of the earlier legal counsel. The new legal advisor prepared and filed the appeal before ITAT, citing the mistake on the part of the previous counsel. The delay was condoned based on the absence of malafide intent in not filing the appeal, and a decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court was relied upon where a delay of 1652 days was condoned due to advocate negligence. The Tribunal admitted the appeal after condoning the delay.
Non-deduction of tax on payments made: The assessee made various payments without deducting tax, leading to proceedings u/s. 201(1) of the Income-tax Act. The AO raised a liability u/s. 201(1) at &8377; 53,956/- and interest u/s. 201(1A) at &8377; 14,991/-. The assessee contended that once the payees had paid the tax, no TDS was required to be deducted, referring to a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The assessee agreed that all payees had declared the receipts in their incomes, claimed as expenditure by the assessee. The matter was set aside to the AO to verify if the payees had included the receipts in their incomes, and if so, the assessee should not be treated as defaulting u/s. 201(1) of the Act, leading to a reduction in the demand. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.
Separate Judgement: None mentioned.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
TaxTMI 
