INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 260A Rule 24

Appeal (High Court) - Alternate remedy - Restoration of appeal as dismissed for non-prosecution -

Assessee had preferred this appeal for setting aside the order passed by Tribunal whereby the appeal filed by assessee was dismissed in default, though as per rule 24 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963, the appellate authority was required to decide the appeal on merits. In support of her contentions, assessee relied upon an order passed by High Court in the case of “Om Prakash Sangwan v. ITO” (2018) 94 taxmann.com 394 (Delhi) : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 4165 (Del-HC). Revenue held that assessee had a remedy in view of rule 24 proviso to approach the Tribunal for restoration of the appeal which was dismissed for non-prosecution. Held: Assessee had the statutory remedy of filing an application for restoration of appeal which was dismissed for non-prosecution and in view of rule 24 of the Rules, there was no period of limitation prescribed within which the aggrieved party can approach the Tribunal for the purpose of restoration. In view of such circumstances, appeal was found misconceived and the same was dismissed as such but assessee was granted liberty to file an application.

Relied:Om Prakash Sangwan v. ITO (2018) 94 taxmann.com 394 (Delhi) : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 4165 (Del-HC) and Devinder Singh Pannu v. ITO [ITA No. 322/CHD/2016, dt. 9-1-2017]

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : Against the assessee

A.Y. :

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT