Quashing an income tax appeal, the Delhi High Court confirmed that the CIT(A) cannot extend time based on recommendation of the Assessing Officer (AO).
The Tribunal, via the order impugned, disposed of not only the appeals filed by the appellant/revenue vis-à-vis the five A.Y.s referred to hereinabove [i.e., A.Y.s 2004-05 and 2008-09], but also dealt with appeals concerning A.Y.s 2002-03 and 2003- 04.
The decision concerning these A.Y.s, i.e., AY 2002-03 and 2003-04, was not assailed before the Court. Besides this, via a separate order dated 03.06.2020, the Tribunal has dealt with the issues which arise for consideration in the instant appeal, albeit concerning a group company, namely, Soul Space Projects Ltd.
The counsel for the parties agreed that the decision the Court would take vis-à-vis the appeals qua SSPL, concerning the question of law framed, would also apply to appeals filed by the appellant/revenue in matters concerning BLK.
The relevant part of the judgment dated 11.12.2023 rendered in ITA 526/2023 and 568/2023 is that “the initial exercise of the power has been explicated as one that is not administrative, the CIT(A) could not have extended the time based on the recommendation of the AO. However, the enunciation of this legal principle does not derogate from our observation above that since the discretionary power was vested in the AO (which was non-delegable), it could not have been exercised by the CIT, irrespective of the nature of the power.”
A Division Bench Comprising Justices Rajiv Shakdher and Girish Kathpalia observed that “Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in the judgment rendered in ITAs 526/2023 and 568/2023, the questions of law, as framed, are answered against the appellant/revenue and in favour of the respondent/assessee. The appeals are disposed of, in the aforesaid terms.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
