TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 222
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee had filed condonation application a/w. affidavit dated 31.12.2025. The relevant part of the said affidavit is extracted as follows: 3. We have carefully considered the contents of the condonation petition as well as affidavit and we do not find any malafide or deliberate conduct on the part of the assessee for the said delay. That the Revenue has also not brought on record any counter affidavit nor any evidence to demonstrate that such delay had occurred due to deliberate conduct, if any, on the part of the assessee. Taking guidance from the judicial pronouncements viz. (i) Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors, reported in 167 ITR 471 (SC); (ii) Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Civil Appeal Nos...............
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e for condonation of delay was non-genuine and false since the assessee had claimed that they had received demand notice and assessment order on 1st April, 2023 i.e. after 11 days of the said documents being uploaded online which was held to be untrue by the said authority. That however, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC has not brought any clarity in his order regarding merits of the submissions of the assessee in terms with Section 249(3) of the Act and at the same time, before passing order, it was duty bound to enquire in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act which was also not complied with by the first appellate authority. Further, the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ispose of the appeal on merits. In fact w.e.f. 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the AO and restore it to the AO for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn. Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CIT(A) are co-terminus with that of the AO i.e. he can do all that A.O could do. Therefore, just as it is not open to the AO to not complete the assessment by allowing the assessee to withdraw its return of income, it is not open to the assessee in appeal to withdraw and/or the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the s. 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Sec. 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of delay and after going through those evidences, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC shall specifically decide whether such delay can be condoned as per Section 249(3) of the Act and then decide on merits of the case in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act. Further, as per the dictate of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom), the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had no power to dismiss an appeal in limine on the ground of non-prosecution and the same jurisprudence transcends into the situation that the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC has no power to dismiss an appeal in limine on ground of delay only without referring and discussing the contents of the assessment order ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....RAIPUR (C.G.) INDIA REG.No. 17692 INDIA NOTARIAL KGNO: 17692 NOVOLT AF NOTARUT AFFIDAVIT BEFORE THE NOTARY PUBLIC RAIPUR Rajesh Singhania s/o Shri Rambilas Agrawal, aged about 62 years, identified by PAN AKBPS4354B residing at B-22/11, Udaya Society, Tatibandh, Raipur (C.G.), Karta of Rajesh Kumar Singhania HUF do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath on behalf of my HUF as under: a. That I have participated in the re-assessment proceedings and the assessing officer has passed an order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 21/03/2023. b. That I have filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act and mentioned mail id on which notices shall be sent as uday.raj.s....