Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 27 (0.58 seconds)
Documents citing Vijayeswari Textiles Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 1 October, 2001

Jagdish Raj Chauhan, Sohagwanti And ... vs Income Tax Officer on 16 November, 2005

11.4 Lastly, the learned Authorised Representative has relied on the judgment of Madras High Court in the case of Vijayeswari Textiles Ltd. v. CIT (supra) to contend that since the learned CIT(A) has decided the appeals on merits, it should be accepted that CIT(A) was convinced about the condoning of delay. We have carefully referred to the judgment of Madras High Court and find the same as distinguishable on facts. In the case before Madras High Court, the facts were that the Tribunal declined to condone the delay in filing the appeal late for 60 days due to death of the senior assistant of the company, who was looking after the income-tax work and his death took place immediately after the receipt of CIT(A)'s order. But the Tribunal did not stop at it. Rather, Tribunal recorded detailed finding for dismissing the appeals on merits. The High Court found that there were sufficient reasons for the delay in filing the appeal and further even on merits the order of the Tribunal was not tenable. In this case, the appeals have been dismissed primarily for the reasons that requirement of Section 249(4)(a) was not complied with and there was a delay in filing the appeals without any justifiable reasons. On p. 6 of the order, the CIT(A) has made a cryptic reference about the merits. One additional ground was not admitted. As regards other grounds, the learned CIT(A) has observed that these grounds are mostly infructuous. There is no detailed discussion about the submissions of the assessee and merits of grounds. In fact the main ground relates to charging of interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C. But there is hardly any discussion about the merits of such ground. Therefore, it is difficult to accept that CIT(A) has decided the ground by passing reasoned and judicious orders. Be that as it may, the learned CIT(A) ought to have not made any comments on the merits of grounds once the appeals were dismissed on the ground of non-payment of tax on returned income and delay in filing the appeals. But at the same time we do not find anything in the impugned orders to suggest remotely that CIT(A) has condoned the delay or entertained any doubt in this regard particularly when no reasons whatsoever existed/explained before the CIT(A) and even before us. Therefore, this submission is also rejected.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Amritsar Cites 42 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Nafees Sultana,Hyederabad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(1), ... on 28 April, 2025

11. Apropos the contention of the Ld. AR that now when the CIT(A) had disposed of the appeal on both the issues based on which the impugned order was assailed before him, viz., (i) as regards the validity of the jurisdiction assumed by the A.O. for initiating proceedings u/s 147 of the Act; and (ii) the merits of the addition of Rs. 1.10 crore (approx.) made by the A.O., therefore, there was no justification on his part in observing that the delay involved in the filing of the appeal does not merit to be condoned, we find substance in the same. As stated by the ld. A.R, and rightly so, now when the assessee's appeal had been disposed of by the CIT(A) on both the issues based on which the impugned order was assailed before him, therefore, we are unable to fathom that on what basis he had concluded that the delay involved in filing the appeal was not being condoned by him. Our aforesaid view is 8 Nafees Sultana ITA No.642/Hyd/2025 supported by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Vijayeswari Textiles Ltd. Vs. CIT (2002) 256 ITR 560 (Mad) wherein it was, inter alia, observed that as the Tribunal while declining to condone the delay involved in the appeal, had proceeded with and elaborately considered and rejected the appeal on merits, therefore, it was to be inferred that the Tribunal was itself not convinced that the appeal should be dismissed as barred by limitation. For the sake of clarity, the observations of the Hon'ble High Court are culled out as under:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt.Sreelatha Ramdas, Trivandrum vs The Acit, Trivandrum on 9 March, 2020

"14. I have carefully considered the rival submissions and the opinion of the Hon'ble AM and the Hon'ble JM in their orders. I agree with the opinion of the Hon'ble JM. As held by him when the CIT(A) decided to consider the appeal on merits for advancement of substantial cause of justice, it is presumed that in terms of provisions of Sec.249 and 250 of the Act, the delay is deemed to have been condoned and the appeal was deemed to have been admitted. I derive support for the above proposition from the decision of the Hon'ble Madras Madras High Court in the case of Vijayeswari Textiles Ltd vs. CIT (2003)(131 Taxman 833) on identical circumstances, i.e., in the case before Hon'ble Madras High Court, the Tribunal had refused to condone the delay, but disposed the appeal on merits also. The Hon'ble Madras High Court observed as under:-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Cochin Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mandadi Vijaya Lakshmi,Hyderabad vs Ito., Ward-7(1), Hyderabad on 26 November, 2025

10. We thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations, are of the firm conviction that as the CIT(A) in the present case before us did not stop with the order declining to condone the delay, but had specifically observed that the appellant's case does not hold good on merit too, 7 ITA No. 214/Hyd/20225 Mandadi Vijaya Lakshmi Vs. ITO therefore, the only inference that can be drawn by relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in Vijayeswari Textiles Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) is that he had impliedly condoned the delay involved in the appeal filed before him.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Medsave Health Insurance Tpa Limited , ... vs Acit,Cpc Tds, Ghaziabad on 29 March, 2023

8.3 We have given thoughtful consideration to the finding of the Ld. Commissioner in declining to condone the delay. In our considered view, once the ld. Commissioner declined to condone the delay in filling of the appeal being time barred by limitation, then there is no need to go into merits of the case, vice versa, once the Ld. Commissioner decided the appeals on merits then the inference can be drawn that delay if any, in filling of appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted. The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Vijayeswari Textiles Ltd vs. CIT (2003)(131 Taxman 833) also dealt with an issue, where the Tribunal had refused to condone the delay, but disposed off the appeal on merits also. The Hon'ble Madras High Court held that if the appeal is adjudicated on merits, then refusing to condone the delay is an error. For ready reference, the concluding part of the judgement is reproduced below:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sh. Dal Chand Sharma, Alwar vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Alwar, Alwar on 27 May, 2024

In case of Medsave Health Insurance Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) ITAT Delhi Health Insurance Vs ACIT: ITA No. 1027, 1028 & 1014 to 1016/Del/2022 Date of Judgement/Order: 29/03/2023 affirmed the views of The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Vijayeswari Textiles Ltd vs. CIT (2003) (131 Taxman 833 where in it was held that if the appeal is adjudicated on merits, then, refusing to condone the delay in filing of an appeal is an error. Action of refusing to condone the delay, but, to dispose of the appeal on merit is untenable in law-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur Cites 38 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Doulatpura Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari ... vs Assessment Unit, Income Tax ... on 1 April, 2025

1, therefore, hold that the appeal has been filed beyond the prescribed time limit of section 249(2) of the Act, hence the Delay cannot be condoned and appeal In case of Medsave Health Insurance Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) ITAT Delhi Health Insurance Vs ACIT: ITA No. 1027, 1028 & 1014 to 1016/Del/2022 Date of Judgement/Order: 29/03/2023 affirmed the views of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Vijayeswari Textiles Ltd vs. CIT (2003) (131 Taxman 833 where in It was held that if the appeal is adjudicated on merits, then, refusing to condone the delay in filing of an appeal is an error. Action of refusing to condone the delay, but, to dispose of the appeal on merit is untenable in law. -
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Zoos And Parks Authority Of ... vs Dcit., Exemption Circle-1(1), ... on 6 May, 2025

This view is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in 11 ITA.No.114 to 118/Hyd./2025 the case of Vijayeswari Textiles Ltd., vs., CIT (supra) wherein it has been held that, the Tribunal did not stop with the order declining to condone the delay, but, consider the matter on merits and has practically treated the appeal as being properly filed before it and has answered the question before it with reference to the material placed on record. It is, in view of these facts and circumstances, we hold that the Tribunal has not committed error in not condoning the delay.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Zoos And Parks Authority Of ... vs Dcit., Exemption Circle-1(1), ... on 6 May, 2025

This view is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in 11 ITA.No.114 to 118/Hyd./2025 the case of Vijayeswari Textiles Ltd., vs., CIT (supra) wherein it has been held that, the Tribunal did not stop with the order declining to condone the delay, but, consider the matter on merits and has practically treated the appeal as being properly filed before it and has answered the question before it with reference to the material placed on record. It is, in view of these facts and circumstances, we hold that the Tribunal has not committed error in not condoning the delay.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Zoos And Parks Authority Of ... vs Dcit., Exemption Circle-1(1), ... on 6 May, 2025

This view is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in 11 ITA.No.114 to 118/Hyd./2025 the case of Vijayeswari Textiles Ltd., vs., CIT (supra) wherein it has been held that, the Tribunal did not stop with the order declining to condone the delay, but, consider the matter on merits and has practically treated the appeal as being properly filed before it and has answered the question before it with reference to the material placed on record. It is, in view of these facts and circumstances, we hold that the Tribunal has not committed error in not condoning the delay.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next