Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Uttar Pradesh Water Supply and Sanitation Mission Vs ACIT (ITAT Lucknow)
Appeal Number : I.T.A. No.192/Lkw/2020
Date of Judgement/Order : 01/07/2020
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Uttar Pradesh Water Supply and Sanitation Mission Vs ACIT (ITAT Lucknow)

Passing ex-parte order when assessee could not attend the proceedings due to lockdown is not justified in law. Since Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, vide letter dated 24th March, 2020 had issued directions for stopping of the work of all offices for a period of 21 days starting from 25/03/2020 but learned CIT(A) passed the order on 27/03/2020 which is not in accordance with the law.

FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of learned CIT(A)-I, Lucknow dated 27/03/2020 pertaining to assessment year 2017- The appeal was heard through video conferencing.

2. In this appeal the assessee has taken various grounds by which it has argued that the assessee cannot be subjected to tax as the assessee is a society registered u/s 12A of the I.T. Act and in the earlier years it enjoyed exemption u/s 11 of the Act. It was further argued that the CIT(A) has hurriedly passed the order on 27/03/2020, which was a lockdown period and thereafter the Department has taken a huge amount of about Rs.125 crores from its bank account as part of the demand created illegally. It was argued that Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, vide letter dated 24th March, 2020 had issued directions for stopping of the work of all offices for a period of 21 days starting from 25/03/2020 but learned CIT(A) passed the order on 27/03/2020 which is not in accordance with the law and the circumstances prevailing at that point of time as due to lockdown the assessee could not represent itself before CIT(A). Learned counsel for the assessee was asked as to whether he will be willing to go back to CIT(A) for readjudication as none had appeared before him due to lockdown, learned A.R. stated that he is willing to go back to CIT(A) but requested that a particular time frame may be fixed for passing the appropriate order.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031