Mehrunnisan Sherwani vs. ITO, Ward 28(1), New Delhi

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee did not file her return of income for the assessment year 2012-13. The Assessing Officer passed an order under section 144 of the Act, adding Rs. 83,90,000/- under section 69 of the Act dated 27.11.2019. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who dismissed the appeal on account of delay in filing the appeal, without considering the merits of the appeal. The assessee then appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the interest of justice would be served if the issues in dispute were remitted back to the file of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) with directions to consider the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the penalty imposed under section 271F was erroneous?
• 2. Whether the appeal was dismissed correctly due to delay?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Karakulam Service Co-operative Bank Limited v. The Income Tax Officer

  Cochin bench

• Hari Mohan and Sons Vs. The Income-tax Officer

  Delhi 'B' Bench benchAY 2013-14Allowed

• Bisauha Ram Verma Vs ITO-1(2), Raipur

  Raipur bench

• Shri. Ranjeet Jain, Prop ashok Cotton Traders Apmc Yard, Ranebennur, Haveri – 581 115. Vs. ITO, Ward – 2, Haveri.

  C Bench, Bangalore benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• Purvanchal Communication Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Guwahati

  Guwahati bench

• Ravinder Singh Sethi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-24(1)

  Mumbai “D” Bench benchAY 2018-19Allowed