The late return could not get submitted post lapse of 1 year from the finish of the assessment year (AY), the income tax appellate tribunal (ITAT), Jodhpur Bench.
The stated observation was made by the Jodhpur ITAT at the time when the petition was preferred before it via the taxpayer as against the order of the CIT(A), Ajmer on 19-08-2019 for the AY 2010-11.
The mere basis of the petition of the taxpayers is that on the facts and conditions of the case, the CIT(A) erred in sustaining the order under section 154 through which AO surged the interest levied under section 234A, from Rs 8297 to Rs 97493, refusing to comply which the judgment of the Bombay High court and the Jodhpur ITAT bench which the taxpayer referred at the time of the hearing, Shri Goutam Chand Baid, CA, the AR of the taxpayer prayed that the lower authorities have erred in affirming the order issued via AO under Section 153 of the Income Tax Act.
The order of the authorities mentioned below would be backed by Shri S.M. Joshi, the JCIT-DR.
The Jodhpur ITAT remarked after hearing both parties’ opposing arguments and studying the evidence on record:
“We have heard both parties and perused the materials available on record. It is not imperative to repeat the facts of the case as the ld. CIT(A) has elaborately mentioned the case in his order. It is noted from the submission of the ld. AR of the assessee wherein he referred to Bombay High Court in the case of Priti Pithawala vs ITO (2003) 129 Taxman 79 wherein it is observed that a belated return cannot be submitted after the expiry of one year from the end of the assessment year.”
“If any assessment is made for the first time under Section 147 then the assessee cannot be made to pay interest for the period during which it was not possible on the part of the assessee to file a return i.e., after one year from the end of the assessment year till issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act”, the ITAT Panel of Kul Bharat, the Judicial Member, and Manish Borad, the Accountant Member witnessed.
Hence permitting the petition of the taxpayer, the Jodhpur ITAT ruled:
“Hence, in this view of the matter, the order passed by the AO under Section 154 is not in accordance with law and we do not concur with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.”
|Case Title||Smt. Bhawna Nagori vs The ITO Ward-4|
|Assessee by||Shri Goutam Chand Baid, CA|
|Revenue by||Shri S.M. Joshi, JCIT-DR|
|Jodhpur ITAT||Read Order|