Read More: https://www.taxscan.in/non-cognizance-of-income-tax-demand-orders-and-tax-position-by-old-accountant-itat-condones-delay-of-217-days-prior-to-covid-period/275740/
Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/non-cognizance-of-income-tax-demand-orders-and-tax-position-by-old-accountant-itat-condones-delay-of-217-days-prior-to-covid-period/275740/
By Aparna. M – On May 8, 2023 12:00 pm – 2 mins read
The Ahmedabad bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) recently while condoning the delay of 217 days prior to covid period, observed that old accountant filed the returns without consideration of income tax demand orders and tax position.
In the aforesaid case assessee is a registered cooperative housing society under Gujarat Cooperative Act, 1961. Assessee maintains regular books of accounts and other record which was subject to cooperative audit.
After filing the return assessee’s return was processed under Section 143(1) determining the total income at Rs. 10,39,251/-due to adjustment of income replaced by Rs. 10,39,251/- as total income against the NIL income.
Thereafter assesee filed an rectification application under section 154 of the Act and it was rejected and confirmed the adjustment made under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A).
The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
S. N. Divatia counsel for the assessee submitted that there was a delay of 217 days occurred for filing the return due to the mistake of assessee’s tax consultant.
Further, counsel for assessee submitted that when the assessee society came to know the same after the Covid period, the assessee society appointed another tax consultant / Chartered Accountant after the change of office bearers of the society and made enquiries of the Income Tax Portal to ascertain the latest tax position. So CIT(A) has not condoned the delay and dismissed the appeal.
Bholaram Devashi, counsel for the revenue submitted that assessee did not explain the delay properly before the CIT(A) and supported the decision of the CIT(A).
The tribunal observing the contentions of the both parties, found that the tax consultant of the assessee has not followed all the tax demands and the necessary submissions made to the Revenue Authorities during the pre-covid period .
Therefore, the single member bench of Suchitra Kamble, (Judicial Member) remanded back the issues contested by the assessee society to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication.To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
Avalon Courtyard-2 Coop Housing Service Society Ltd. vs ITO
CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (ITAT) 929
Counsel for Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora
Counsel for Respondent: Shri Bholaram Devashi
Be the First to get the Best
Join Our email list to get the latest Tax Updates , Special Offers, Events delivered right to your Inbox
Email Address *