D.C.I.T Cir - 5,kolkata, Kolkata V. M/s Hindustan Copper Ltd, Kolkata

ITA 1319/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5042 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 03-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N O N E
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY BHATTACHARYA F
• Keywords: Assessment record; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH: KOL KATA [BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI M. BALAGANES H, AM] I.T.A NO.1319/KOL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, VS. HINDUSTAN C OPPER LTD. CIRCLE-5, KOLKATA. (PAN: AAACH7409R) ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) DATE OF HEARING: 03.03.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 03.03.2016 FOR THE APPELLANT: N O N E FOR THE RESPONDENT: SHRI SANJAY BHATTACHARYA, F CA ORDER PER SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: THIS APPEAL BY REVENUE IS ARISING OUT OF ORDER OF C IT(A)-VI, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO. 287/CIT(A)-VI/CIR-5/2011-12/KOL DATED 11.12.201 2. ASSESSMENT FOR AY 2006-07 WAS FRAMED BY JCIT (OSD), CIRCLE-5, KOLKATA U/S. 14 4/147 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) VIDE HIS ORD ER DATED 30.12.2011. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THIS MATTER EX PARTE BECAUSE NONE IS PRESENT FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. REVENUE HAS FILED A PETITION FOR ADJO URNMENT ASKING FOR ADJOURNMENT IN EIGHT MATTERS. THE REASON GIVEN BY REVENUE IN ITS PETITION DATED 02.03.2016. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED THE ADJ OURNMENT PETITION STATING THE REASONS THAT THE APPEAL IS PENDING SINCE 2013 AND R EVENUE WANTS TO ADJOURN THE MATTER ON FRIVOLOUS GROUND. IN VIEW OF THIS FACT, WE PROC EED TO HEAR THE MATTER EX PARTE FOR THE REASON THAT THE REVENUE IS SEEKING ADJOURNMENT ON F RIVOLOUS GROUND AND THIS IS A REGULAR FEATURE. HENCE, WITHOUT GIVING ADJOURNMENT, AS THE APPEAL IS PENDING SINCE 2013, WE PROCEEDED TO DECIDE IT EX PARTE. 3. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE APPEAL IS DELAYED BY 63 DAYS AND THE REASONS STATED IN THE AFFIDAVIT READ AS UNDER: I, SHRI AJAY KUMAR KESHARI, SON OF DR. BANSHROPAN PD. KESHARI, AM WORKING AS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, KOLKATA, P-7, CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, KOLKATA- 700069, SOLEMNLY AFFIRM THAT THE LAST DATE FOR FILI NG SECOND APPEAL AGAINST THE APPEAL NO. 941/CIT(A)-VI/CIR-5/2011-12/KOL DATED 11.12.2012 IN THE CASE OF M/S. HINDUSTAN COPPER LIMITED FOR THE AY 2006-07 WAS ON 15.03.2013. BUT IT COULD NOT BE FILED FOR FOLLOWING REASONS: 16/03/2013 & 17/03/2013 SATURDAY & SUNDAY 18/03/2013 TO 22/03/2013 AO. BUSY WITH T.B. CASE. 2 ITA NO.1319/K/2013 HINDUSTHAN COPPER LTD. AY 2006-07 23/03/2013 & 24/03/2013 SATURDAY & SUNDAY 25/03/2013 & 26/03/2013 PREPARATION OF ASR 27/03/2013 HOLIDAY 28/03/2013 AO. BUSY WITH T.B CASE. 29/03/2013 HOLIDAY 30/03/2013 & 31/03/2013 SATURDAY & SUNDAY 01/04/2013 TO 05/04/2013 ASSESSMENT RECORD GATHER ED. 06/04/2013 & 07/04/2013 SATURDAY & SUNDAY 08/04/2013 TO 12/04/2013 PREPARATION OF PAPERS FO R SENDING ASR 13/04/2013 & 14/04/2013 SATURDAY & SUNDAY 15/04/2013 HOLIDAY 16/04/2013 TO 19/04/2013 PREPARATION OF PAPERS FO R SENDING ASR 20/04/2013 & 21/04/2013 SATURDAY & SUNDAY 22/04/2013 ASR SENT TO CIT, KOL-II, KOL 23/04/2013 APPROVAL FOR FILING 2ND APPEAL A WAITED. 24/04/2013 HOLIDAY 25/04/2013 & 26/04/2013 APPROVAL FOR FILING 2NA A PPEAL AWAITED. 27/04/2013 & 28/04/2013 SATURDAY & SUNDAY 29/04/2013 TO 02/05/2013 APPROVAL FOR FILING 2ND APPEAL AWAITED. 03/05/2013 APPROVAL FOR FILING 2NA APPEAL RECEIVED. 04/05/2013 & 05/05/2013 SATURDAY & SUNDAY 06/05/2013 TO 10/05/2013 PAPERS FOR FILING 2ND AP PEAL PREPARED 11/05/2013 & 12/05/2013 SATURDAY & SUNDAY 13/05/2013 TO 15/05/2013 PAPERS FOR FILING 2ND AP PEAL PREPARED 16/05/2013 AFFIDAVIT FOR CONDONATION OF DE LAY IN FILING 2ND APPEAL PREPARED. DUE TO HUGE PENDENCY OF TIME BARRING CASES, DELAY O CCURRED IN SENDING PAPERS FOR FILING OF SECOND APPEAL. THAT THE DELAY IS NOT DELIBERATE AND THE RESPONDENT DOES NOT GAIN IN ANY MANNER BY DELAY COMMITTED. THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DELAY AND I T IS PRAYED THAT THE SAME MAY BE CONDONED. 4. THE REVENUE HAS STATED THAT THE REASONS STATED I N THE AFFIDAVIT APPEAR TO BE GENUINE AND DELAY HAS OCCURRED DUE TO PENDENCY OF C ASES BEFORE THE AO. ACCORDING TO THE REVENUE, THE DELAY IS NOT AT ALL DELIBERATE AND IT IS NOT GOING TO GAIN IN ANY MANNER BY COMMITTING DELAY, WHICH WAS INADVERTENT. 5. WE FIND THAT THE REVENUE COULD NOT FILE EXPLANAT ION FOR DELAY AND COULD NOT EXPLAIN WHETHER BONA FIDE EFFORTS WERE MADE OR NOT. HENCE, WE ARE UNABLE TO ACCEPT THE UNUSUAL EXPLANATION THAT THE FILE WAS KEPT PENDING FOR SEVERAL MONTHS DUE TO CONSIDERABLE DEGREE OF PROCEDURAL RED TAPE IN THE P ROCESS. IN SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES, HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF OFFICE OF THE POSTMASTER VS. LIVING MEDIA INDIA LTD. IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2474-2475 OF 2012 (ARISING OUT OF SLP(C) NOS. 7595-7596 OF 2011 DATED 24.02.2012, WHEREIN IT IS HELD AS UNDER: 3 ITA NO.1319/K/2013 HINDUSTHAN COPPER LTD. AY 2006-07 13) IN OUR VIEW, IT IS THE RIGHT TIME TO INFORM ALL THE GOVERNMENT BODIES, THEIR AGENCIES AND INSTRUMENTALITIES THAT UNLESS THEY HAVE REASONA BLE AND ACCEPTABLE EXPLANATION FOR THE DELAY AND THERE WAS BONAFIDE EFFORT, THERE IS NO NE ED TO ACCEPT THE USUAL EXPLANATION THAT THE FILE WAS KEPT PENDING FOR SEVERAL MONTHS/YEARS DUE TO CONSIDERABLE DEGREE OF PROCEDURAL RED-TAPE IN THE PROCESS. THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ARE UNDER A SPECIAL OBLIGATION TO ENSURE THAT THEY PERFORM THEIR DUTIES WITH DILIGENCE AND COMMITMENT. CONDONATION OF DELAY IS AN EXCEPTION AND SHOULD NOT BE USED AS AN ANTICIPATED BENEFIT FOR GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS. THE LAW SHELTERS EVERYONE U NDER THE SAME LIGHT AND SHOULD NOT BE SWIRLED FOR THE BENEFIT OF A FEW. CONSIDERING TH E FACT THAT THERE WAS NO PROPER EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE DEPARTMENT FOR THE DELAY EXCEPT MENTIONING OF VARIOUS DATES, ACCORDING TO US, THE DEPARTMENT HAS MISERABLY FAILE D TO GIVE ANY ACCEPTABLE AND COGENT REASONS SUFFICIENT TO CONDONE SUCH A HUGE DELAY. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEALS ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSE D ON THE GROUND OF DELAY. IN SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES WE HAVE ALREADY REFUSED TO CONDONE THE DELAY OF FILING APPEAL OF REVENUE IN ITA NO. 1192/KOL/2012 FOR AY 2008-09 IN THE CASE OF DCIT VS. M/S. THE ORISSA MINERALS DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD. IN SUCH CIRCUM STANCES, WE REFUSE TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND HENCE THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED AS UNADMITTED ON THE GROUND OF DELAY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. 7. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (M. BALAGANESH) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 3 RD MARCH, 2016 JD. SR. P.S COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT DCIT, CIRCLE-5, KOLKATA 2 RESPONDENT M/S. HINDUSTHAN COPPER LTD., 1, ASHUTO SH CHOWDHURY AVENUE, TAMRA BHAWAN, KOLKATA-700 019 3 . THE CIT(A), KOLKATA 4. 5. CIT KOLKATA DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA / TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, ASSTT. REGISTRAR .