https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460324 ITAT Bangalore condoned delay in filing appeal before CIT(A) against intimation u/s 143(1) containing addition u/s 43B. Assessee had bonafide belief that addition would be addressed in scrutiny assessment since notice u/s 143(2) was issued prior to intimation date. Following SC precedent in Collector Land Acquisition v. Katiji, tribunal held "sufficient cause" should serve ends of justice. Revenue showed no malafide intention or crystallized rights due to delay. Technicalities must yield to substantial justice. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Fri, 10 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 19 Jan 2025 09:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460324 ITAT Bangalore condoned delay in filing appeal before CIT(A) against intimation u/s 143(1) containing addition u/s 43B. Assessee had bonafide belief that addition would be addressed in scrutiny assessment since notice u/s 143(2) was issued prior to intimation date. Following SC precedent in Collector Land Acquisition v. Katiji, tribunal held "sufficient cause" should serve ends of justice. Revenue showed no malafide intention or crystallized rights due to delay. Technicalities must yield to substantial justice. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460324