2025 (2) TMI 1219

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ar Shrivastava, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocate. JUDGMENT ON BOARD 1. The present appeal preferred by the Appellant/Assessee under Section 260 of the Income Tax Act, 1956 (the Act) was admitted for hearing by this Court on 21.2.2025 by formulating the following substantial question of law:- "Whether the ITAT is justified in dismissing the appeal preferred by the Appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessee has failed to deduct TDS on the amount of interest paid/credited and therefore imposed a penalty of Rs. 7,70,000/- under Section 271C of the Act against the assessee. Assailing the said penalty order passed by ACIT (TDS), the assessee preferred an appeal before Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] who affirmed the penalty order passed by ACIT (TDS) and dismissed the appeal of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....310-26311/2024, decided on 31.1.2025. has condoned the delay of 166 days in filing the appeal and therefore the impugned Order passed by the ITAT is also liable to be set-aside and the delay of 161 occurred in filing of the appeal be condoned. In this regard, learned Counsel has also relied upon the Order dated 4.2.2025 of this Court passed in Tax Case No. 166 of 2024 Pradeep Kumar Khandelwal v. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the impugned Order rejected, holding that no justifiable reason has been assigned by the assessee for the inordinate delay of 161 days involved in filing the appeal and accordingly the appeal was also dismissed being barred by limitation. 7. The Supreme Court vide its Order dated 31.1.2025 passed in the matter of Vidya Shankar Jaiswal (supra) while setting aside the order of this Court rejecting ....