Ramesh Kodi , Warangal V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Warangal

ITA 1102/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0740 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-12-2019
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 28-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3); 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A - SMC, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1102/HYD/20 18 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 14 - 15 SRI RAMESH KODI, WARANGAL. PAN: BIGPK 2619 Q VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, WARANGAL. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SMT. SANDHYA REVENUE BY: SRI RAVI BABU, DR DATE OF HEARING: 16/12/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 16/12/2019 ORDER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 8, HYDERABAD IN APPEAL NO. 10395/CIT(A) - 8/HYD/2017 - 18, DATED 28/07/2018 PASSED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S 250(6) OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y. 2014 - 15. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN ITS APPEAL: 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS BOT H ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL AND IN DISPOSING THE APPEAL IN LIMINI. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE PROVIDED PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT BEFORE DECIDING THE APPEAL. 5. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT THE PROFIT FROM THE LIQUOR BUSINESS IS 3% OF THE COST OF SALES AND NOT 5% OF THE COST OF PURCHASE AS DETERMINED BY THE A.O. 2 6. ANY OTHER GROUND OR GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR SU BMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER WITHOUTPROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) ALSO DID NOT CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL THOUGH THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL HAD OCCURRED DUE TO THE ILLNESS OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS BEYOND HIS CONTROL. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) MAY BE CONDONED AND THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT (A) IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PURSUE THE APPEAL . LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR AND ARGUED THAT SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE HOWEVER, ON THE GIVEN DATES OF HEARING, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). LD. D R FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PRODUCED MEDICAL CERTIFICATES FOR HIS ILLNESS TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF HIS CLAIM AND THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT (A) HAD NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO PASS EX - PARTE ORDER BASED ON THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HENCE, IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE AND APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE MAY BE DISMISSED. 3 4. I HAVE HE ARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. ON EXAMINING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, I FIND MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR. THE LD. CIT (A) HAD POSTED THE CASE ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS . HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE ABOVEMENTIONED DATES OF HEARING. MOREOVER, IT IS APPARENT THAT THERE IS A LONG DELAY OF 9MONTHS 13 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH HIS CL AIM OF ILLNESS. IN THIS SITUATION, I DO NOT FIND MUCH STRENGTH IN THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LD. AR. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE PRAYER OF THE LD. AR, AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I HEREBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT (A) WITH DIRECTION TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE HIM AND TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL AFRESH BY PROVIDING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. AT THE SAME BREATH, I ALSO HEREBY CAUTION THE ASSESSEE TO PROMPTLY CO - OPERATE BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) IN THE PROCEEDINGS FAILING WHICH THE LD. CIT (A) SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND MERITS BASED ON THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. 4 PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH DECEMBER, 2019. S D / - ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 16 TH DECEMBER , 2019 OKK COPY TO: - 1) SRI RAMESH KODI, H.NO. 1 - 8 - 460. BALASAMUDRAM, HANMAKONDA, WARANGAL. 2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, AYAKAR BHAVAN, OPP. RAILWAY STATION WARANGAL. 3) THE CIT(A) - 8, HYDERABAD 4) THE PR. CIT - 3, HYDERABAD 5) THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6) GUARD FILE