Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Sreemitra Townships P. Ltd. Versus DCIT, Circle 3 (2) Hyderabad

2016 (5) TMI 413 - ITAT HYDERABAD

Condonation of delay - Held that:- the assessee has been vigilant and has been pursuing the legal remedy but under a wrong provision. We find that the efforts of the assessee have been bonafide and the assessee has not been insolent, negligent or lethargic in pursuing its legal remedies/appeal.

The Cochin Tribunal in the case of Kadakkal Educational Trust (2014 (9) TMI 959 - ITAT COCHIN) has also taken note of the bonafide pursuit of the appeal before wrong Forum as a reasonable cause .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

6-07. In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by the Order of the Ld. CIT(A) in not condoning the delay of 62 months and 24 days in filing of the appeal before him/her against the order under section 143(3) dated 31.12.2008 for the A.Y. 2006-07 and not disposing of the appeal on merits. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company which is engaged in the business of real estate had filed its return of income for A.Y. 2006-07 on 08.11.2006 admitting income of ₹ 1,03,23,560. Th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

before the A.O. on 19.01.2009 for rectification of the assessment order under section 143(3) and the A.O. vide orders dated 23.06.2009 allowed the petition with respect to contributions/ donations received by the assessee but with regard to disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), the A.O. held that there were no mistakes apparent from record and therefore, the petition did not merit consideration under section 154 of the Act. It was submitted that the assessee, thereafter, filed an appeal before t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

31.03.2013 upheld the view of the Ld. CIT(A) holding that the issue contained in the petition under section 154. did not fall within the scope of section 154. It is submitted that it is thereafter, that the assessee preferred an appeal under section 260 of the I.T. Act before the Hon ble High Court of A.P. and subsequently, on advice of its Counsel in the High Court, the assessee has filed the appeal before the CIT(A) resulting in a delay which is neither willful nor wanton and was beyond the co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pursuing other legal remedies under a bonafide belief that they were maintainable and there was no willful neglect on the part of the assessee in pursuing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Further, he has also placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Land Acquisition Collector vs. SS Katiji and others (1987) 167 ITR 471 wherein, while referring to the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act, the Hon ble Supreme Court has held that a liberal approach ha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

The Ld. D.R. however, supported the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee is required to explain every days delay and since the assessee has not been able to explain the delay in a reasonable manner, assessee s appeal needs to be dismissed. 5. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material available on record, we find that the assessee has been vigilant and has been pursuing the legal remedy but under a wrong provision. We find that the efforts of the assessee have b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lity before law demands that all litigants including the State as a litigant, are accorded the same treatment and the law is administered in an even-handed manner. There is no warrant for according a step- motherly treatment when the "State" is the applicant praying for condonation of delay. In fact, experience shows that on account of an impersonal machinery (no one in charge of the matter is directly hit or hurt by the judgment sought to be subjected to appeal) and the inherited bure .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version