Shri. Vijaya Babu T.R, Bangalore V. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

ITA 1373/BANG/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9363 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 01-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NARESH SAKA
• Assessee Lawyers: J TEJAVATHI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 27; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRI BUNAL BANGALORE BENCH SMC, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1373 & 1374(BANG) 2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 09) SRI VIJAYA BABU T.R., 40/1, 1 ST FLOOR, 3 RD CROSS, 4 TH BLOCK, KUMARAPARK WEST, BANGALORE 560020 PAN : ABSPV2645M APPELLANT VS ITO, WARD 6 (4), BANGALORE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY :SMT. J. TEJAVATHI, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI NARESH SAKA JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 22-09-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : -09-2016 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M.: BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR T HE SAME ASSESSMENT YEAR. ONE APPEAL IS ARISING OUT OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THE SECOND APPEAL IS IN THE PROCEEDINGS OF PENALTY U/S 271 (1) (B) OF THE I. T. ACT, 1961. BOTH APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY WAY OF THIS C OMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. BOTH APPEALS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE CIT (A) AFTER DELAY OF 1114 DAYS AND 957 DAYS RESPECTIVELY AND THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESS EE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING APPEALS WAS REJECTED BY CIT (A) WITH A CLEAR FINDIN G THAT THE ORDER U/S 144 WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF ON 09.02.2011 AND ORDER U/S 27 1 (1) (B) WAS SERVED ON 27.06.2011 AND THEREFORE, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THIS EXPLANATIO N OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING DELAY THAT THE RELEVANT ORDERS WERE NOT SERVED. HE HELD THAT T HESE APPEALS ARE NOT ADMISSIBLE U/S 249 (2). 3. LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING APP EALS BEFORE CIT (A). ACCORDINGLY, BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. (A.K. GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE: D A T E D : .09.2016 AM* ITA NO. 1373 & 1374(BANG) 2016 2 COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A)-II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER, AR, ITAT, BANGALORE 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER . 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAF T COMES TO THE SR. P. S. .. 4 DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT .. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S. .. 6. DATE OF UPLOADING THE ORDER ON WEBSITE .. 7. IF NOT UPLOADED, FURNISH THE REASON FOR DOING SO . 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 9. DATE ON WHICH ORDER DOES FOR XEROX & ENDORSEMENT . 10. DATE O N WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 11 THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER. 12 THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE DISPATCH SEC TION FOR DISPATCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER 13 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER