Pennar Electronics Pvt.Ltd, Bangalore V. ITO, Hyderabad

ITA 1095/HYD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3378 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 24-01-2011
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 18-08-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMLAN TRIPATHY
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMA RAO

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1095/HYD/2010 : ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998- 99 M/S. PENNAR ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. BANGALORE. (PAN AAACQ O733 H) VS INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD - 16(2), HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.RAMA RAO RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AMLAN TRIPATHY O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-V, HYDER ABAD DATED 23.62.2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1998-99. 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APP EAL IS THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN REJECTING THE APPEAL OF THE ASS ESSEE AS TIME BARRED BY 28 DAYS WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE, AND THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNIT Y BEFORE PASSING THE ORDER REJECTING TO ADMIT THE APPEAL. 3. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PLEADED BEFOR E US THAT THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PUT FORTH ITS CASE WITH REGARD T O DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. ACCORDING TO HIM, THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER ONLY ON 5.9.2008 AND NOT ON 5.4.2008, AS NOTE D LBY THE CIT(A) ITA NO.1095/H/2010 M/S. PENNAR ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. BANGALORE 2 IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL R EPRESENTATIVE ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE C IT(A). 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSION AND PER USED THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A). IN OUR OPINION, THE ACTUAL DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BY THE ASSESSEE HAS TO BE VERIFIED WITH REFERENCE TO RECORDS SO AS TO DETERMINE THE PE RIOD OF DELAY, IF ANY, IN THE FILING OF THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE BE FORE THE CIT(A), AND THEN THE ASSESSEE SHOULD ALSO BE GIVEN REASONABLE O PPORTUNITY BY THE CIT(A) TO PUT FORTH ITS CASE WITH REGARD TO DELAY, IF ANY, IN THE FILING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE HIM. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE SE T ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTE R TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO VERIFY THE CORRECT PERIOD OF DELAY, IF ANY, IN THE FILING OF THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM WITH REFERENC E TO RECORDS, AND THEN, AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE TO PUT FORTH ITS CA SE/JUSTIFICATION WITH REGARD TO DELAY, IF ANY, DECIDE WHETHER SUCH DELAY DESERVES TO BE CONDONED, AND INCASE HE IS INCLINED TO CONDONE SUCH DELAY, IF ANY, HE SHALL DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 5. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED AT THE CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON THE APPEAL ON 20.4.2011 \ SD/- SD/- ( G.C. G UPTA ) ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) V ICE PRESIDENT A CCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 20TH APRIL,, 2011 ITA NO.1095/H/2010 M/S. PENNAR ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. BANGALORE 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. PENNAR ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. (BANGALORE) C/O. SHRI S.RAMA RAO, FLAT NO.102, SHIRYA'S ELEGANCE, NO.3-6-643, ST. NO. 9, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD 500029. 2. INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD - 16(2) , HYDERABAD 3. CIT (A) - V , HYDERABAD. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX IV, HYDERABAD 5. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ITAT HYDERABAD B.V.S.