Bengal Distribution House vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Malda
Parties Involved
Facts Summary
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee, Bengal Distribution House, for the assessment year 2017-18 against the order dated 31.07.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). The assessment was completed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Act with an addition of Rs.71,02,210/- and penalty under section 271AAC(1) of the Act was imposed by the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed as the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) as barred by limitation of 868 days in filing the appeal. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. AR challenges the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) thereby submitting that the ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee only on the ground of delay. He submits that the assessee company consists of two partners namely Shri Narendra Narayan Das and Sri Asis Kundu. The ld. AR also submits that Shri Narendra Narayan Das has died and he has submitted the death certificate of the partner of the assessee-company.…
Decision in favour of
Assessee
Legal Issues
- 1. Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned?
Judgment Outcome
Decided in favour of Assessee.
Similar Judgements
ITO, Ward-27(1), Haldia Vs. H Port Emp Co Socy Limited
Kolkata 'A' Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2017-18DismissedKalpanik Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO, Ward-4(4), Kolkata
Kolkata Bench benchAY 2009-10Partly AllowedIncome Tax Officer Ward-4(3), Kolkata Vs. Abha Fuels Private Limited
Kolkata ‘A’ Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2012-13DismissedHimanshu Mittal vs. Income Tax Officer
Agra benchV3 Corporation vs. Income Tax Officer
Agra benchSumitra Devi Bihani vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Siliguri
Kolkata Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed