Case Law Details
Inderjit Singh Manchanda Vs CIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Introduction: In the recent decision by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai in the case of Inderjit Singh Manchanda vs. CIT, the tribunal addressed an application for condonation of delay of 451 days concerning an appeal for penalty proceedings. This article provides an in-depth analysis of the case, examining the reasons for delay, arguments presented by both parties, and the tribunal’s decision to dismiss the condonation application.
Detailed Analysis: The applicant-assessee, Inderjit Singh Manchanda, sought condonation of a delay of 282 days in filing an appeal (ITA No. 2963/Mum/2023), although the office noted a delay of 451 days. The delay arose from the non-filing of a return of income for the assessment year 2011-12, despite notices issued by the Assessing Officer. The cash deposit of Rs.12,23,200/- in the applicant’s bank account led to the reopening of the case under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Despite multiple notices, the assessee failed to respond, leading to the assessment of the entire cash deposit as income and the initiation of penalty proceedings. The appeal challenging this assessment was dismissed by the CIT(A), prompting the present appeal with a substantial delay.
The applicant argued that the delay was unintentional, attributing it to a lack of awareness of legal provisions and the consultant’s inability to provide timely assistance due to old age and technological constraints. However, the tribunal, applying established legal principles, found the reasons insufficient to establish “sufficient cause” for condonation of delay.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
