Shri Mahavirkumar C. Jain, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 1078/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8132 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

SMC-ITA NO. 1078/AHD/2017 MAHAVIRKUMAR C JAIN VS. ITO ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD [ BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT ] ITA NO. 1078/AHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 MAHAVIRKUMAR C. JAIN ............APPE LLANT 704A/7/1, RAMNIVAS BUILDING, OPP. KHARA KUVA NI POLE, RELIEF ROAD, AHMEDABAD [PAN : ABGPJ 2096 L] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER ..... .......................RESPONDENT WARD 2(2), AHMEDABAD APPEARANCES BY: MEHUL TALERA, FOR THE APPLICANT JAMES KURIAN, FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 18.02.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 16.04.2019 O R D E R 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HA S CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF LEARNED CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 13 TH JANUARY 2017, IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. GRIEVANCES RAISED BY THE APPELLANT ARE AS FOLLOW S:- 1) THAT ON FACTS AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN NOT GRANTING CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING APPEAL AND IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL AS TIME BARRED. 2) THAT ON FACTS AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUG HT TO HAVE CONDONED THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL AND OUGHT TO HAVE DECIDED IT ON MERITS, AS PER LAW. 3. TO ADJUDICATE ON THIS APPEAL, ONLY A FEW MATERIA L FACTS NEED TO BE TAKEN NOTE OF. THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS BELATED APPEA L AND IT WAS TIME BARRED BY OVER 19 MONTHS. THE DELAY WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE AS FOLLOWS. IT WAS STATED THAT THE ADDRESS ON WHICH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS SERVE D DID NOT BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE INASMUCH AS THE ASSESSEE HAD VACATED THE S AID PREMISES MUCH BEFORE THE SERVICE OF ORDER. IT WAS THEN STATED THAT THE A SSESSEES MOTHER HAS SUFFERED A HEART ATTACK, HIS BROTHER WAS UNDERGOING TREATMENT FOR SERIOUS HEART AILMENT AND HIS FATHER HAD UNDERGONE AN OPEN HEART SURGERY. THE AS SESSEE ALSO SET OUT OTHER MEDICAL PROBLEMS THAT HE AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS WER E GOING THROUGH. IT WAS THEN EXPLAINED THAT THE ASSESSEE DISCOVERED HIS BONFIDE MISTAKE ONLY WHEN, IN OCTOBER 2015, HIS BANK ACCOUNT WAS SUBJECTED TO RECOVERY PR OCEEDINGS BY THE INCOME TAX SMC-ITA NO. 1078/AHD/2017 MAHAVIRKUMAR C JAIN VS. ITO ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 PAGE 2 OF 3 DEPARTMENT. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IMMEDIATEL Y UPON SO DISCOVERING THE ERROR, IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER 2015, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE APPEAL. THIS EXPLANATION WAS, HOWEVER, REJECTED BY THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) REJECTED THE EXPLANATION AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL AS TIME BARRED . THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED AND IS IN APPEAL BEFORE ME. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE AP PLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 5. I FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE APPARENTLY OVERLOOKED S ERIOUSNESS OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF ASSESSMENT FRAMED UPON HIM, AS HE W AS SAID TO BE UNDERGOING A DIFFICULT TIME ON PERSONAL FRONT AND HIS FAMILY MEM BERS HAD SERIOUS HEALTH ISSUES. IT WAS ONLY UPON HIS BANK ACCOUNT BEING ATTACHED THAT THE GRAVITY OF HIS MISTAKE WAS REALIZED AND IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER THE APPEAL WAS FILED. WHEN SOMEONE IS GOING THROUGH A DIFFICULT PATCH OF TIME ON HEALTH AND FAM ILY FRONT, SUCH A LAPSE CANNOT BE RULED OUT BONAFIDE. IT WAS ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTIC E THAT ALMOST IMMEDIATELY UPON BANK ACCOUNT BEING ATTACHED, THE APPEAL WAS FILED. ON THESE FACTS, AND BEARING IN MIND THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL, I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT A LENIENT VIEW ON THE CONDONATION OF DELAY SHOULD HAV E BEEN TAKEN. IN MY CONSIDERED VIEW, THEREFORE, IT WAS A FIT CASE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). 6. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, AND BEARING IN MIND ENTIRETY OF THE CASE, I DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE F ILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR CONDONING THE DELAY AND ADJUDICATING THE MATTER ON MERITS. I FUR THER DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO APPROACH THE CIT(A) ON HIS OWN WITHIN 15 DAYS OF RE CEIPT OF THIS ORDER, TO FULLY COOPERATE ON EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL AND TO ENSURE THAT SUCH INFORMATION, AS THE CIT(A) MAY REQUISITE, IS FURNISHED IN TIME. ORDERED, ACCORDINGLY. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 16 TH APRIL, 2019. SD/- PRAMOD KUMAR (VICE PRES IDENT) AHMEDABAD, THE 16 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 **BT COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD