Rajdeep Leasing and Finance (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO Ward 21(1), Delhi

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

Both cases were filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Nagpur for Assessment Year: 2014-15. The assessee appealed against the rejection of their appeal on the grounds that it was time-barred and that the fee charged under section 234E of the Act was levied illegally. The assessee argued that the date of the letter 'intimation of outstanding demand' should be considered as the date on which the order denying relief was communicated to them.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in rejecting the appeal on the ground that it is time-barred.
• 2. Whether the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate and note that the date of the letter 'intimation of outstanding demand' should be considered as the date on which the order denying relief was communicated.
• 3. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in considering the application as time-barred.
• 4. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in not deleting the fee under section 234E of the Act which was levied illegally.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• M/s Gokul Distributors Vs. ITO (TDS-1), Pune

  Pune bench

• ITA Nos. 634 to 639/Del/2024

  Delhi bench

• ALI FAZAL Vs. Income Tax Officer TDS Ward

  Mumbai benchAY 2020-21Partly Allowed

• Mr. Ramesh Artimal Shivnani Vs. ITO, TDS-2, Thane

  Mumbai bench

• Samara Carpets Private Limited vs. ACIT, CPC Tax-TDS

  Delhi bench

• Ozhur Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. vs. The Income Tax Officer (TDS)

  Cochin bench