Putul Rani Saha, Dakshin Dinajpur V. ITO, Ward - 1, Balurghat, Dakshin Dinajpur

ITA 114/KOL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 11423514 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 04-08-2014
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 17-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PIYUSH KOLHE
• Keywords: Bonafide belief; Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

, SMC , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH : KOLKATA () . . , [BEFORE HONBLE SRI B.R.MITTAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER] / I.T.A NO. 114/KOL/2011 !' #$%/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 PUTUL RANI SAHA -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER/WARD-1 DAKSHIN DINAJPUR [PAN : AOYPS 9305 L] BALURGHAT. [ '( /APPELLANT ] [ *+'(/ RESPONDENT ] '( / FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE *+'( / FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI PIYUSH KOLHE, SR . D.R. ,- / ORDER . . , PER B. R. MITTAL, J. M. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 AGAINST ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), JALPAIGURI DATED 01.09.2010 ON FOLLOWING GR OUNDS :- (1) THAT FOR LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY NOT APPRECIATING T HE SPIRIT OF THE LETTER OF C.B.D.T. BEING NO.241/23/70 DATED 23.10.1970. MORE OVER, IF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS PASSED ON 07.12.2006, HE FAILED TO EXPLAIN FOR WHAT GOOD REASON THE LD. A.O. HAS DISPATCHED ON 10.01.2007. A S A CONSEQUENCE YOUR APPELLANT HAS A VALID APPREHENSION THE ASSESSMENT W AS MADE BY MAKING ANTE DATED SIGNATURE. (2) THAT THE LD. CIT(A), JALPAIGURI, HAS ERRED BY RAISING HIS OBJECTION OVER THE VALIDITY OF CIRCULAR ISSUED BY C.B.D.T. NO.243 DATE D 22.06.1978 IN CONTEXT OF INTEREST BY RAISING FLIMSY PRETEXT OF METHOD OF KEEPING ACCOUNTS. THE CIRCULAR HAS NO NEXUS WITH THE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTS. SO THE ADDITION SUSTAINED BY NULLIFYING THE C.B.D.T. CIRCULAR DESERVES TO BE DECLARED VOID. MOREOVER HE ERRED BY NOT STATING THE REASON FOR SUSTAINING T HE ADDITION PARTICULARLY WHEN YOUR APPELLANT HAS SHOWN THE YEARLY INCOME ON ACCRUED INTEREST IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME. (3) THAT THE LD. CIT(A), JALPAIGURI, HAS ERRED BY S USTAINING RS.10,000.00 OF ADDITION MADE BY THE ITO, WARD-I, ON THE PRETEXT OF INFLATING EXPENDITURE. IF HE IS SO CERTAIN ABOUT EXCESS CLAIM OF EXPENDITURE, WHY HE FAILED SPECIFY ITA NO. 114/KOL/20 11 2 WHICH ARE THE EXCESS CLAIM OF EXPENDITURE THAT NEED S TO BE SUSTAINED. SO SUSTAINING THE ADDITION MADE ON SURMISE NEEDS TO BE DELETED. 2. THE APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS DELAYED BY 50 DA YS. ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT STATING THAT THE DELAY OCCURRED DUE TO THE FOLLOWING REASON S :- (A) SHE WAS UNDER BONAFIDE BELIEF THAT APPEAL BEFORE TR IBUNAL COULD BE POSSIBLE ONLY AFTER RECEIPT OF ORDER U/S. 251 OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT. (B) MARRIAGE OF HER YOUNGER SISTER WAS SOLEMNISED O N 10.12.2010. (C) PAPERS WERE SENT TO HER ADVOCATE BUT REQUISITE FEE U/S. 249 COULD NOT BE SENT TO ADVOCATE. HENCE, THERE IS A DELAY IN FILING APPEAL. 3. NOTICE WAS SENT TO ASSESSEE BY REGISTERED POST F IXING THE DATE OF HEARING OF APPEAL FOR 25.04.2011. NONE PRESENT ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. 4. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT T HE REASONS GIVEN BY ASSESSEE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 50 DAYS ARE NOT JUSTIFIABLE FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BE DISMIS SED. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 5. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF LD. DEPARTME NTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND THE PAPER PLACED ON RECORD. I AGREE THAT THERE IS NO REASONABLE CAUS E TO CONDONE THE DELAY OF 50 DAYS. THE DELAY HAS OCCURRED DUE TO NEGLIGENCE OF ASSESSEE. HENCE, I DO NOT FIND A REASONABLE CAUSE JUSTIFYING THE CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 50 DAYS. THEREFORE, THE APP EAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS BARRED BY LIMITATION AND SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED BEING BARRED BY LIMI TATION. HENCE, DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ,- . /! 0 12 34 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 25. 04. 2011. SD/- [ . . , ] [B.R.MITTAL ] JU DICIAL MEMBER (34) DATED : 25. 04. 2011. ITA NO. 114/KOL/20 11 3 ,- 5 *6 7,6$/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. '( /APPELLANT- SMT. PUTUL RANI SAHA, C/O. ANIMESH CH ANDRA SAHA, HIGH SCHOOLPARA, P.O. GANGARAMPUR, DIST. DAKSHIN DINAJPU R. 2 *+'( / RESPONDENT : INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BALURGHA T [CIT(A), JALPAIGURI]. 3. -!/ CIT, 4. -! ()/ CIT(A), KOLKATA. 5. #=0 *!/ DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA [+6 */ TRUE COPY ] ,-!// BY ORDER , ? /ASSTT REGISTRAR. [KKC #@A !B? C# /SR.PS]