2026 (6) TMI 1398

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uestion the order dated 04.06.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru Bench 'C', Bengaluru, in ITA No. /Bang/2019 relating to the Assessment Year 2007-08. The appeal was admitted on 10.02.2022 to examine the following questions of law:- (i) Whether the Id. ITAT correct in not considering the fact that the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was only 34 days not 8 years since the revision petition was files before the CIT only against the notice u/s.245 of the Act and the intimation u/s. 143(1) received only on 20.01.2017. (ii) Whether the Id. ITAT ought of have allowed the exemption claimed u/s. 10(38) of the Act in respect of capital gain on sale of shares and refrained from confirming....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... revision petition came to be dismissed on 27.02.2017 on the ground of limitation. The appellant contends that a copy of the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act was furnished to him only on 20.01.2017. Subsequently, he filed an application under Section 154 of the Act on 22.03.2017 and also preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on 25.03.2017 challenging the intimation dated 20.03.2009. 7. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), by order dated 28.03.2019, declined to condone the delay and held that the appeal was not maintainable in view of the appellant having already invoked the revisional jurisdiction under Section 264 of the Act and further held against the appellant on merits. Aggrieved thereby,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the Act. 10. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Revenue supported the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal. It was contended that the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act was issued on 20.03.2009 and that the appellant had admittedly acquired knowledge of the demand at least upon receipt of the communication dated 06.11.2014 issued under Section 245 of the Act. It was submitted that the appellant himself filed a revision petition under Section 264 of the Act on 14.07.2015 seeking cancellation of the very same demand and therefore cannot contend that he was unaware of the proceedings until 20.01.2017. 11. It was further contended that notwithstanding the knowledge of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nology of events, found that the appeal against the intimation dated 20.03.2009 ought to have been filed within the prescribed period and that the appeal preferred on 25.03.2017 was delayed by about eight years. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) further noticed that even if the date on which the appellant had admittedly acquired knowledge of the demand was taken into consideration, the delay remained unexplained. Accordingly, the delay was not condoned. 15. The Tribunal, on independent consideration of the material on record, affirmed the said finding and observed that the appellant had taken different stands while pursuing the matter and that substantial periods of delay between the various steps taken by him remained unexplained....