I.T.A. NOS. 1274 & 1275/KOL./2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-2007 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA A BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 1274 & 1275/KOL/ 2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-2007 M/S. KREENG CONSTRUCTION,.......................... ...........................APPELLANT B.T. SARKAR ROAD, BYE LANE, PURULIA-723 101 [PAN: AAJFM 1994 L] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ .................................RESPONDENT WARD-3(3), PURULIA, SOUTH LAKE RODA, PURULIA-723 101 APPEARANCES BY: SHRI MIRAJ D. SHAH, FCA, FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI S.M. DAS, JCIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : MARCH 01, 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : MARCH 04, 2016 O R D E R PER SHRI P.M. JAGTAP :- THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTE D AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASANSOL DATED 20.03.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, WHEREBY HE DISMISSED THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM CHALLENGIN G THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTY OF RS.1,09,300/- UNDER SECTION 271FB OF THE ACT AND RS.4,025/- UNDER SECTION 271(1)(D) OF THE ACT, BY TREATING THE SAID APPEALS AS BARRED BY LIMITATION. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AN D ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AS POINTED O UT BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THE REPRESENTATIVE DULY AUTHORIZED BY THE ASSESSEE HAD I.T.A. NOS. 1274 & 1275/KOL./2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-2007 PAGE 2 OF 3 APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND THE MERITS OF THE CASE WAS ALSO DISCUSSED. AS FURTHER POINTED OUT BY HIM, THE PENAL TY ORDERS, AS PER INFORMATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN FORM NO. 3 5, WERE RECEIVED ON 16.07.2010. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), HOWEVER, NOTED TH AT THE SAID ORDERS, AS PER THE RECORDS WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WERE RE CEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 01.06.2010 AND SINCE THERE WAS A DELAY ON THE PA RT OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING ITS APPEALS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) GOIN G BY THE SAID DATE AND THERE WAS NO PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CON DONATION OF THE SAID DELAY, HE DISMISSED THE SAID APPEALS IN LIMINE TREA TING THE SAME AS BARRED BY LIMITATION. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASPECT OF SO-CALLED DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS THU S WAS NOT POINTED OUT BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) TO THE ASSESSEE GIVING HIM AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN HIS STAND OR TO SEEK THE CONDONATION OF DELAY, IF A NY, AND THIS POSITION, WHICH IS CLEARLY EVIDENT FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDERS O F THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), COULD NOT BE DISPUTED EVEN BY THE LD. D.R. WE, THEREFORE, CONSIDER IT JUST AND PROPER TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUG NED ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND REMIT THE MATTERS BACK TO HIM WITH A DIRECTION TO CONSIDER THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESESE ARE T REATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON MARCH 04, 201 6. SD/- SD/- (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 4 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2016 COPIES TO : (1) M/S. KREENG CONSTRUCTION, B.T. SARKAR ROAD, BYE LANE, PURULIA-723 101 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3), PURULIA, SOUTH LAKE RODA, PURULIA-723 101 I.T.A. NOS. 1274 & 1275/KOL./2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-2007 PAGE 3 OF 3 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), ASANSOL (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.