SHRI SURENDRA BADRIPRASAD VERMA, Mumbai V. I.T.O. - 16(1)(4), Mumbai

ITA 1052/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6832 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 23-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHAUDHARY ARUN KUMAR SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: K GOPAL MS NEHA PARANJPE
• Keywords: Application of stay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G , BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH , AM ITA NO.1052/MUM/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012 - 13) & SA NO.58/MUM/2019 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 1052 / MUM/20 1 8) ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012 - 13 ) S HRI SURENDRA BADRIPRASAD VERMA, 5 & 6, 3 RD FLOOR, DESAI VILLA JAI BHAVANI MATA ROAD AMBOLI, ANDHERI (W) MUMBAI 400 058 VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 16(1)(4), ROOM NO.438, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD MUMBAI 400 020 PAN/GIR NO. AABPV6852A ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RES PONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY SHRI K. GOPAL / MS. NEHA PARANJPE REVENUE BY SHRI CHAUDHARY ARUNKUMAR SINGH DATE OF HEARING 26 / 02 /201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28 / 02 /201 9 / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M) : ITA NO.1052/MUM/2018 THIS APPEA L FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 4, MUMBAI [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE LD CITA] DATED 13/02/2017 FOR A.Y.2012 - 13 IN THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED U/S.143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. ITA NO. 1052/MUM/2018 & S.A.NO.58/MUM/2019 SHRI SURENDRA BADRIPRASAD VERMA 2 2. AT THE OUTSET, WE FIND THAT THERE IS A DELAY OF 285 DAYS IN FILING OF THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. AR PLACED ON RECORD THE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE NARRATING THE FACTS THAT HE WAS FULLY DEPENDENT ON THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT TO HANDLE H IS INCOME TAX AFFAIRS. THE SAID AFFIDAVIT ALSO STATED THAT THE SAID CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WAS DIAGNOSED WITH CANCER IN AUGUST 2015 AND AFTER PROLONGED TREATMENT, THE SAID CA ULTIMATELY EXPIRED ON 15/12/2017. 2.1. THE LD. AR ALSO SUBMITTED THAT EVEN THE ORD ER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WAS PASSED EXPARTE WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF THE ASSESSEE OR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT IN LAST COLUMN OF FORM NO.35 BEING MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE SAID CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OFFI CE WAS MENTIONED AS THE ADDRESS TO WHICH NOTICE OF HEARING NEED TO BE SENT. THIS GOES TO PROVE THAT ASSESSEE WAS COMPLETELY UNAWARE ABOUT THE NOTICES THAT WERE ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND NON - APPEARANCE OF THE SAID CA BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) . THE ASSESSEE FURTHER MENTIONED IN HIS AFFIDAVIT THAT HE WAS FOLLOWING IT UP WITH THE SAID CHARTERED ACCOUNTAN T S OFFICE BUT COULD NOT GET ANY RESPONSE FROM THEM. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE WAS INFORMED IN FEBRUARY 2018 THAT SOME OTHER CHARTERED ACCOUNTAN T HAD TAKEN OVER VARIOUS CLIENTS AND FILES OF OLD CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT PURSUANT TO THE DEMISE AND ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE CONTACTED THE NEW CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WHO INFORMED THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DATED 13/02/2017 WAS LOCATED IN ON E ENVELOPE RECEIVED FROM OFFICE OF THE ITA NO. 1052/MUM/2018 & S.A.NO.58/MUM/2019 SHRI SURENDRA BADRIPRASAD VERMA 3 OLD CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT. BASED ON THIS, THE ASSESSEE IMMEDIATELY PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAD SUFFICIENTLY EXPLAINED THE DELAY IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND WE ARE INCLINED TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR ADJUDICATION. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AT THE OUTSET WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED AN EXPARTE ORDER IN VIEW OF THE REASONS REFERRED TO SUPRA. HENCE, WE DEEM IT FIT AND APPR OPRIATE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY , TO REMAND THIS APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW UN INFLUENCED BY EARLIER DECISION TAKEN IN THIS REGARD. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SA NO.58/MUM/2019 THIS STAY APPLICATION AROSE OUT OF ITA NO.1052/MUM/2018 . 4. AS WE HAVE ALREADY DISPOSED ASSESSEES APPEAL, T HIS STAY PETITION OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND THE STAY PETITION IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 28 / 02 /201 9 SD/ - ( MAHAVIR SINGH ) SD/ - ( M. BALAGANESH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED 28 / 02 /201 9 ITA NO. 1052/MUM/2018 & S.A.NO.58/MUM/2019 SHRI SURENDRA BADRIPRASAD VERMA 4 KARUNA SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD F ILE. //TRUE COPY//