The Chennai bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) held that the Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeals ) [ CIT( A ) ] had erred in noting the correct facts submitted by the assessee and thus remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The assessee, Amuthasurabi Educational Trust, has challenged the order passed by the CIT( A ) pertaining to the assessment year 2020-21. The ITAT, in the beginning itself, condoned the 28-day delay in filing the appeal.
The counsel, on behalf of the assessee, by referring to Form No. 35 submitted that the CIT(A) erred in noting that there was a delay of 415 days in filing of the appeal. It was stated by the counsel that the impugned order is just a copy of the first appellate order for AY 2021-22, and the CIT-DR did not dispute this.
Get a Handbook on TDS Including TCS as Amended up to Finance Act 2024, Click Here
The bench noted that intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was
issued on by the authorities on 29-12-2023. The assessee filed the first appeal Form No. 35 on 29-01-2024.
The ITAT, going through the records, noted that the first appeal, Form No. 35, was filed within time, and CIT(A) has erred in noting the correct facts.
The bench set aside the impugned order and remitted the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication in the light of correct facts.
The ITAT, comprising Manu Kumar Giri ( Judicial Member ) and Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ( Accountant Member ) allowed the appeal filed by the assessee for statistical purposes.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
