Medavakkam Vattara Nadargalikkiya Sangam v. ITO (2024) 232 TTJ 76 (UO)/ 38 NYPTTJ 1359 (Chennai)(Trib)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Delay of 1694 days-Appeal is dismissed-CIT(A) cannot dismiss the appeal for default expressly or by inevitable implication; appellate authority has to decide the appeal on merits-Matter remanded to the file of CIT(A) to decide on merits.[S. 250]

Held that the CIT(A) cannot dismiss the appeal for default expressly or by inevitable implication; appellate authority has to decide the appeal on merits; CIT(A) having summarily dismissed the assessee’s appeal for default for the reason that the assessee has not submitted petition for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is remanded back to his file for fresh adjudication. Followed  State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Pradeep Kumar (2000) 7 SCC 372,  Southern Steel Industries v. AAC (CT) (1996) 101 STC 273 (Mad) (HC). (AY. 2016-17,  2018-19 to 2021-22)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*