Sri Anil Reddy Linga Reddy, Hyderabad V. ITO, Hyderabad

ITA 1413/HYD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 59422 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-03-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 12-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR B V PRASAD REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: K A SAI PRASAD
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER. ITA NO.1413/HYD/2010 : ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2007-08 SHRI ANIL REDDY LINGA REDDY, HYDERABAD (PAN - ABFPL 8856 R ) V/S INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.A.SAI PRASAD RESPONDENT BY : DR. B.V.PRASAD REDDY DATE OF HEARING 26 3.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30.3.2012 O R D E R PER D.KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-V HYDERABAD DATED 30.09.2010 FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, 2. EFFECTIVE GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEA L READ AS FOLLOWS- 1) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX IS NOT J USTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL ON THE ISSUE OF DELAY IN FILI NG THE APPEAL. 2) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX IS NOT JU STIFIED IN NOT ACCEPTING THE REASON GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT FOR THE DELAY OF 29 DAYS IN FILING THE FIRST APPEAL. 3) THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS NOT JUS TIFIED IN NOT CONDONING THE DELAY ESPECIALLY WHEN THE APPELLANT H AD FILED DETAILS IN RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC ISSUES RAISED BY TH E HONBLE COMMISSIONER. 4) THE LEARNED THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT EXAMINING THE CASE ON MERITS. ITA NO.1413/HYD/2010 SHRI ANIL REDDY LINGA REDDY, HYDERABAD 2 3. WE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATER IAL ON RECORD. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN NOT CONDONING THE DELAY IN THE FILING OF THE FIR ST APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM, AND IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL AS TIME-BA RRED WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS THEREOF. IN THE PETITION FILED BE FORE THE CIT(A) SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY IN THE FILING OF THE FIRST APP EAL, IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THE ASSESSEES PERMANENT ADDRESS WAS THE ONE WHERE HIS FATHER WAS STAYING, WHEREAS HE WAS STAYING AWAY WITH HIS WIFE IN A RENTED HOUSE AT BANJARA HILLS; THAT HE STARTED A NEW PARTNERSHIP B USINESS IN GUJARAT; THAT DURING THE RELEVANT TIME, VIZ. MONTHS OF JANUA RY AND FEBRUARY, 2010, WHEN HE WAS IN GUAJARAT IN CONNECTION WITH THE NEW BUSINESS, HE RECEIVED TELEPHONIC MESSAGE FROM HIS FATHER INFORMI NG ABOUT RECEIPT OF SOME PAPERS FROM INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, UPON WHICH HE REQUESTED HIS FATHER TO KEEP THEM IN SAFE CUSTODY; AND THAT IMMED IATELY AFTER RETURN FROM AHMEDABAD IN THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, HE ARRANGE D THE FILING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), IN CONSULTATION WITH HIS TAX CONSULTANTS, M/S. CH. PARTHASARATHY & CO. THE CIT(A), OBSERVING THAT THERE IS NO CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THIS VERSION OF THE ASSESSEE JUSTIFYING THE DELAY, DECLINED TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL AS TIME-BARRED. ON CONSIDERING TOTALITY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN A PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION FOR THE DELAY, AND THERE IS NO REASON TO DOUBT THE BONA FIDE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE IN GETTING THE APPEAL FILED IMMEDIATEL Y ON RETURN FROM AHMEDABAD, AS CLAIMED BY HIM. WE FIND THAT CONSIDE RING THE PERIOD OF DELAY INVOLVED, VIZ. 29 DAYS AND THE REASON ADDUCED FOR SUCH DELAY, BALANCE OF CONVENIENCE IS ALSO IN FAVOUR OF THE ASS ESSEE AND THERE IS JUSTIFICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. IN THIS V IEW OF THE MATTER, WE FIND THAT THIS IS A FIT CASE FOR THE CONDONATION OF DELA Y. WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A), AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A), WITH A DIRECTION TO CONDONE THE DELA Y AND DECIDE THE APPEAL ITA NO.1413/HYD/2010 SHRI ANIL REDDY LINGA REDDY, HYDERABAD 3 BEFORE HIM ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND AFT ER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE.. 4. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 30.3.2012 SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (D.KARUNAKARA R AO ) JUDICIAL MEMBER. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. DT/- 30TH MARCH, 2012 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. SHRI ANIL REDDY LINGA REDDY, C/O. M/S. CH.PARTH ASARATHY & CO., 1-1-298/2/B/3, 1 ST FLOOR, SOWBHAGYA AVENUE, STREET NO.1, ASHOKNAGAR, HYDERABAD 500 020. 2. INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), WARANGAL. 3. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-V HYDERABAD COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX IV, HYDERABAD 5 . THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT HYDERABAD B.V.S.