9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 849 - AT - Income TaxCondonation of delay filling Rectification application u/s 154 - disallowance u/s 14A - as held by ld. CIT(A) that the assessee has not explained the delay even after dismissal of rectification application - HELD THAT - Before us neither the assessee has explained the delay nor filed any documentary evidence or copy of application filed before the ld. CIT(A) in seeking condonation of delay. Thus, we do not find any justifiable reason in seeking the condonation of delay before the ld. CIT(A). The ratio in the case law relied by assessee in Collector of Land Acquisition vs. Mst Katiji 1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME COURT and in Gera Developments (P.) Ltd. 2016 (8) TMI 1009 - ITAT PUNE is not helpful to the assessee as the facts in both the case law are different. The assessee in this case was aware about the disallowance under section 14A, which was not hesitated by him by filing appeal before first appellate authority. No merit in the grounds of appeal raised by assessee.
Issues:
Delay in filing appeal for condonation, Disallowance under section 14A, Condonation of delay, Application under section 154, Justifiability of delay explanation. Delay in filing appeal for condonation: The appeal was directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-53 for Assessment Year 2009-10. The assessee contended that the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned due to sufficient cause, as the appeal was filed after realizing the necessity during the course of another appeal. The ld. CIT(A) rejected the condonation of delay stating that the explanation provided was insufficient. The delay was not intentional, but the application under section 154 was disposed of before the appeal was filed, leading to non-condonation of delay. Disallowance under section 14A: The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee earned exempt income of &8377; 1942/- and made a disallowance of &8377; 1,59,931/- under Rule 8D. The disallowance comprised interest disallowance and indirect disallowance. The assessee failed to file a first appeal within the prescribed period, leading to a belated appeal. The delay was attributed to the realization of the need to appeal against the original order under section 143(3) r.w. 147 and the order under section 154. Condonation of delay: The assessee sought condonation of delay, citing reasons such as the delay not being intentional or negligent. The written submission emphasized that the delay was not deliberate and relied on legal precedents to support the condonation plea. However, the ld. Departmental Representative argued that no reasonable cause was disclosed for condonation, as the assessee failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay. Application under section 154: The assessee's application under section 154 for rectification against the disallowance under section 14A was dismissed on 02.06.2015. Subsequently, the appeal challenging the disallowance was filed on 27.02.2017. The delay in filing the appeal was not adequately justified before the ld. CIT(A), leading to the dismissal of the appeal. Justifiability of delay explanation: The Tribunal deliberated on the submissions made by both parties and reviewed the case law cited by the assessee. It was observed that the delay in filing the appeal was not adequately explained, and no documentary evidence or application for condonation of delay was provided. The Tribunal found no justifiable reason for condoning the delay before the ld. CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal, citing the awareness of the disallowance under section 14A by the assessee. In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal as it found no merit in the grounds raised by the assessee, emphasizing the lack of satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the appeal and the awareness of the disallowance under section 14A by the assessee.
|
