AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 33
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(A)"] dated 16.12.2024 for the Assessment Year 2021-22, arising from the intimation passed by the Centralised Processing Centre (CPC), Bengaluru under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as " the Act"] dated 09.12.2022. 2. Condonation of Delay 2.1 At the outset, it is noted that the appeal of the assessee has been filed belatedly with a delay of 174 days. The assessee filed an application for condonation of delay accompanied with a duly sworn affidavit of the Secretary of the Sanand Agricultural Produce Market Committee explaining the reasons for the delay. 2.2 In the said affidavit, it has been explained that subsequent to the order of the learned CIT(A) dated 16.12.2024, the assessee had been dilig....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issued by CPC as well as by the CIT(A). It was contended that the assessee cannot take advantage of its own defaults and should not be permitted to plead delay as bona fide. However, when queried, the DR did not press any specific objection to the condonation, leaving the matter to the discretion of the Bench. 2.5 We have carefully considered the submissions and the material on record. It is a well-settled principle of law that in matters of condonation of delay, a liberal approach is warranted when the delay is not deliberate or due to negligence, but on account of bona fide reasons. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji [167 ITR 471 (SC)] has held that substantial justice must prevail over technicaliti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re the CIT(A) raising specific grounds that the income of an APMC is exempt under section 10(26AAB) of the Act, and CPC erred in disallowing the same. 3.3 The CIT(A), however, dismissed the appeal. From the order, it is evident that repeated show-cause notices were issued to the assessee on 28.04.2024, 24.06.2024, 19.09.2024 and 18.10.2024, fixing the hearings on 08.05.2024, 01.07.2024, 27.09.2024 and 25.10.2024 respectively. The assessee did not file any reply to the first three notices, and on the last date sought adjournment till 15.11.2024. The CIT(A) recorded that even after granting ample time, no substantive submission or supporting evidence was placed on record. Observing that the assessee had not submitted any reply or furnished....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me tax return under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, the CPC has not granted an exemption and made an addition of Rs. 3,57,30,363/- (i.e. Total Income), even the expenses incurred by the assessee were not allowed. 2. CIT(A), without rejecting the adjournment application or giving any further notice and without considering the Grounds of Appeal and documents attached along with the Form 35 has dismissed the appeal, which is against natural justice. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or amend any ground on or before the date of hearing. PRAYER OF APPEAL 1. Assessee hereby pray that the exemption of Rs. 3,57,30,363/- under section 10(26AAB) of the Act should be allowed and requests to d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r book. 4. The learned Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, strongly relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. He pointed out that the assessee had been non-compliant throughout the proceedings. Despite repeated statutory notices issued by CPC and by the learned CIT(A), no proper responses were filed and no evidence was produced. Even before the CIT(A), though adjournment was sought, no substantive submissions were made thereafter. 5. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The sequence of events is not in dispute. The assessee, an Agricultural Produce Market Committee, filed its return of income declaring nil income after claiming exemption u/s 10(26AAB).....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he expenditure incurred by the assessee in the discharge of its statutory functions under the Agricultural Produce Market Committee Act cannot be outrightly disallowed. Taxing the gross receipts without allowing legitimate expenditure results in determination of income not in accordance with law. This aspect has also not been examined either by CPC or by the learned CIT(A). 5.4 Considering the totality of facts, while the assessee's conduct has been less than diligent in not complying with notices and in failing to place Form 10B on record, we are of the view that the issue requires reconsideration in the interest of substantial justice. The learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without adjudicating the merits. Given that past assessme....