TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal dismissed for unexplained delay despite s.154 petition; delay beyond 29.05.2022 unjustified; s.155(14) remedy remains</h1> ITAT PUNE upheld Addl./JCIT(A)'s refusal to condone delay and dismissed the appeal. The tribunal found the sole explanation-pursuit of remedy under ... Addl/JCIT(A) justification in refusing to condone the delay in filling appeal - appellant filed a petition praying for condonation of delay on the ground that the delay had occurred in pursuing alternative remedy u/s.154 -Addl./JCIT(A) had refused to condone the delay by holding that the appellant had not given any cogent reasons which prevented the appellant from filing an appeal in time HELD THAT:- In the present case, the only explanation offered before the Addl./JCIT(A) for the delay was on account of pursuing the alternative remedy available u/s.154 of the Act. As noticed that the petition u/s.154 was disposed of by the CPC on 29.04.2021 whereas the appeal was filed on 06.04.2023. No explanation whatsoever was given as to why the appellant could not file appeal between the period 29.04.2021 to 06.04.2023. Computing the period of limitation - Delay upto 29-05-2022 merits to be considered by virtue of Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re [2021 (11) TMI 387 - SC ORDER] read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re [2021 (3) TMI 497 - SC ORDER] and [2022 (1) TMI 385 - SC ORDER]. Even excluding the pandemic Covid-19 prevailed all over the country, the appellant could not explain the reasons for delay for the period from 29.05.2022 to 06.04.2023. Therefore the Addl/JCIT(A) was justified in refusing to condone the delay. However, it is made clear that the dismissal of this appeal does not come in the way of pursuing the other remedy available under subsection (14) of section 155 of the Act. Thus, the appeal filed by the appellant stands dismissed. Appeal against order of Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Vadodara for A.Y. 2018-19 challenging CPC intimation under section 143(1) that accepted returned income but adjusted TDS credit citing a 'Mismatch of Tax Deduction at source'. Return declared income of Rs.4,65,085; TDS claimed Rs.3,27,320 but CPC allowed Rs.1,06,394. Appeal to Addl./JCIT(A) was filed belatedly on 06.04.2023 with a petition for condonation of delay asserting pursuit of remedy under section 154 (petition disposed by CPC on 29.04.2021). Addl./JCIT(A) refused condonation for lack of 'cogent reasons' explaining the period between 29.04.2021 and 06.04.2023. Tribunal, after hearing Revenue representative and noting non-appearance of appellant, found the sole issue to be whether refusal to condone delay was justified. Tribunal observed that even allowing reliance on Supreme Court decisions on limitation (citing Cognizance for Extension of Limitation judgments), the appellant failed to explain delay from 29.05.2022 to 06.04.2023. Appeal dismissed; dismissal 'does not come in the way of pursuing the other remedy available under subsection (14) of section 155 of the Act.'
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
