Nookala Ravinder Reddy, Karimnagar, Hyderabad V. DCIT, Circle-1, Karimnagar, Karimnagar

ITA 1032/HYD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6031 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 18-07-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K J RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMA RAO
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B (SMC), HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1032/HYD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 NOOKALA RAVINDER REDDY, JAGTIAL [PAN: ABGPN5344P] VS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I, KARIMNAGAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI S. RAMA RAO, AR FOR REVENUE : SHRI K.J. RAO, DR DATE OF HEARING : 10-11-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16-11-2016 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-10, HYDERABAD DATED 22-03-2016. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS WITH REFERENCE TO REJECTION OF CONDONATION OF DELAY BY THE CIT(A) AND DISMISSING THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. 2. BRIEFLY STATED, ASSESSEE IS AN EMPLOYEE OF GOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH IN R&B DIVISION. THERE WERE SEARCH AND SEIZ URE PROCEEDINGS AT DELHI AS HE WAS TRAVELLING FROM HYDERA BAD WITH SOME CASH. THERE WERE ADDITIONS MADE IN THE CONSEQUE NTIAL ASSESSMENTS MADE. ASSESSEE HAS APPEALED AGAINST THE A SSESSMENT ORDER BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) WITH A DELAY OF THIRTY FIV E DAYS. 3. ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THAT HE WAS ON MEDICAL LEAV E UPTO 30-04-2014 AND WHILE ON MEDICAL LEAVE, HE WAS TRANSF ERRED TO I.T.A. NO. 1032/HYD/2016 NOOKALA RAVINDER REDDY :- 2 -: BHAINSA IN ADILABAD DISTRICT AND REPORTED ON 01-05-2 014 AND SUBSEQUENTLY, HE COULD COME TO HYDERABAD AND FILE THE APPEAL ON 28-05-2014. ASSESSEE REQUESTED FOR CONDONATION OF D ELAY OF THIRTY FIVE DAYS. 4. HOWEVER, LD.CIT(A) NOTICED THAT THE PROCEEDINGS OF EE, R&B STATES THAT ASSESSEE HAS JOINED DUTY ON 15-04-2015 AND LATER ON, HE WAS TRANSFERRED TO BHAINSA AND SINCE THE ORDER WAS SERVED ON ASSESSEE ON 25-03-2014, HE COULD HAVE FILED THE APPE AL BY 24-04- 2014 ITSELF. THEREFORE, HE WAS OF THE OPINION THAT T HERE IS NO REASON FOR CONDONING THE DELAY AND ACCORDINGLY DISM ISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. 5. LD. COUNSEL REFERRING TO THE STATEMENTS MADE BEFORE THE CIT(A) SUBMITTED THAT, ASSESSEE WAS ON MEDICAL LEAVE U PTO 30-04- 2014 AND THE TRANSFER ORDER WAS ISSUED WHEN ASSESSEE WAS ON MEDICAL LEAVE ITSELF. IN SUPPORT, HE SUBMITTED THAT THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE WAS FURNISHED BY CIVIL SURGEON WHICH WAS PLACED BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT WHILE ON MEDICAL L EAVE, ASSESSEE WAS TRANSFERRED TO BHAINSA AND HE HAD TO REPO RT THERE AND DUE TO HEAVY WORK, HE COULD NOT ATTEND TO HIS PERSON AL MATTERS. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED A REASONABLE EXPLANATION FOR THE DELAY AND AS HE WAS PO STED OUTSIDE HYDERABAD, THE CONDONATION COULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED LIBERALLY. LD. COUNSEL RELIED ON VARIOUS CASE LAW. 6. LD. DR HOWEVER, SUBMITTED THAT THE REASONS GIVEN BY ASSESSEE WERE EXAMINED BY THE LD.CIT(A) AND SUPPORTE D THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A). I.T.A. NO. 1032/HYD/2016 NOOKALA RAVINDER REDDY :- 3 -: 7. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. ASSESSEE A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE, HAS GIVEN AN AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE DELAY WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED AS A GENUINE ONE AS ASSESSEE HAD A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR PREFERRI NG THE APPEAL WITH DELAY OF THIRTY FIVE DAYS. IT IS A FACT THAT ASSE SSEE WAS ON MEDICAL LEAVE UPTO 30-04-2014. IT IS ALSO FACT THAT H E WAS TRANSFERRED WHILE ON MEDICAL LEAVE AND HE HAD TO REPO RT AT NEW PLACE ON 01-05-2014. CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATION GIV EN BY ASSESSEE AND THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS, I AM OF THE OPINI ON THAT THERE IS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR FILING THE APPEAL BELATEDLY . ACCORDINGLY, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT CIT(A) COULD HAVE CONSIDERED TH E CONDONATION OF DELAY AND ADMITTED THE APPEAL. SINCE H E HAS REJECTED THE SAME, I AM SATISFIED THAT THE DELAY IN FILI NG THE APPEAL IS REASONABLE AND ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME IS CONDONED. LD.CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL ON ITS MERITS. FOR THIS PURPOSE, THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE AND APPEAL BEFORE THE CI T(A) IS RESTORED FOR CONSIDERATION ON MERITS. ASSESSEES GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH NOVEMBER, 2016 SD/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 16 TH NOVEMBER, 2016 TNMM I.T.A. NO. 1032/HYD/2016 NOOKALA RAVINDER REDDY :- 4 -: COPY TO : 1. NOOKALA RAVINDER REDDY, JAGTIAL, C/O. SRI S. RAM A RAO, ADVOCATE, FLAT NO. 102, SHRIYAS ELEGANCE, 3-6-643, STREET NO. 9, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD. 2.DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KARIMNAGAR. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-10, HYDERABA D 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT & TP), HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE.