M/s Vyanktesh Packaging, Solan V. ITO, BADDI

ITA 1460/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7983 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 26-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PANKAJ ARORA
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Time period of passing order; Condonation of delay; Set aside

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, B, CHANDIGARH . . , , BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NOS. 1459 TO 1461/CHD/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S VYANKESH PACKAGING, LODHI MAJRA ROAD, VILLAGE NANDPUR, TEHSIL NALAGARH, DISTT. SOLAN VS. ! THE ITO, BADDI (H.P.) ' # ./ PAN NO: AAFFV1677B '$/ APPELLANT &' '$ / RESPONDENT ()*+ /ASSESSEE BY : SH. PANKAJ ARORA, ADVOCATE *+ / REVENUE BY : SH. MANJIT SINGH, CIT DR , -*) .# /DATE OF HEARING : 05.12.2019 /0 *) .# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.12. 2019 / ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE CAPTIONED APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE A SSESSEE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 11.5.2017 / 15.5.2017 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), FARIDABAD [HEREINAFTER REFERR ED TO AS CIT(A)]. 2. ALL THE APPEALS ARE BARRED BY LIMITATION PERIOD RANGING FROM 500 TO 504 DAYS. SEPARATE APPLICATIONS FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY HAVE BEEN FILED, WHEREIN, IDENTICAL AVERMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE. THE CONTENTS OF ONE 2 ITA NOS. 14 59 TO 1461/CHD/2018 M/S VYANKTESH PACKA GING, DISTT. SOLAN OF THE APPLICATION MOVED IN ITA NO. 1459/CHD/2018 A RE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- ITA NO. 1459/CHD/2018 APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY BRIEF FACTS AND REASONS FOR DELAY 1. APPELLANT THROUGH THE ENCLOSED MEMO OF APPEAL PREFERRING APPEAL AGAINST ORDER DATED 15- 05-2017 PASSED BY LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), FARIDABAD FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11, RECEIVED ON 14.07.2018. IN TERMS OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE 'ACT'), APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER MUST BE FILED WITHIN SIXTY DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE ORDER. THUS, THERE IS DELAY IN FILIN G OF APPEAL TO THE EXTENT OF 500 DAYS. 2. THAT THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED BY THE LD. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BADDI ON 26-11- 2012 AND, APPEAL WAS FILED AGAINST THE SAME ON 14.12.2012. 3. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL WAS FIRST LISTED ON 16-07-2015 BEFORE CIT APPEAL. 4. THAT DURING THE PERIOD, ON 10-05-2016 , THERE WAS MAJOR FIRE INCIDENT IN THE FACTORY PREMISES OF THE APPELLANT AND IN THE FIRE ACCIDENT ALL THE PRODUCTION AREA AS WELL AS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE GOT DESTROYED COMPLETELY, ALONG WITH ALL THE RECORDS RELATING TO THE APPEAL OF THE PRESENT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11.THE COPY OF FIR IS ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE -1 3 ITA NOS. 14 59 TO 1461/CHD/2018 M/S VYANKTESH PACKA GING, DISTT. SOLAN 5. THE APPELLANT HAD TO SHUT DOWN HIS OFFICE IN BADDI AND SHIFTED HIS PREMISES DUE TO THE FIRE INCIDENT AND IN THE MEANWHILE OUR MATTER WAS TRANSFERRED FROM CIT (APPEALS), SHIMLA TO CIT (APPEALS) FARIDABAD. THE APPELLANT DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY NOTICE DUE TO PREMISES BEING SHUT DOWN IN BADDI, THEREFORE NO COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT AND THE APPELLANT AND THE MATTER WAS DECIDED EX PARTY ON 15-05-2017.THAT WHILE PURSUING THE APPEAL, THE APPELLANT COME TO KNOW AS THAT THE APPEAL HAS BEEN DECIDED EX PARTY AND ORDERS WERE TO BE PROCURED FROM THE CIT (APPEAL), FARIDABAD . THUS, THE ORDER IN APPEAL FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 WERE PROCURED BY THE APPELLANT ON 14.07.2018 AFTER CONCERTED EFFORTS. 6. THAT THE APPELLANT APPOINTED A CONSULTANT CA FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THIS H'BLE TRIBUNAL AND WAS TOLD TO FIRST PROVIDE ALL THE DOCUMENTS ESSENTIAL FOR FILING THE APPEAL FOR THIS ASSESSMENT YEAR. SINCE, THE COPY OF ORDER IN ORIGINAL WERE NOT AVAILABLE WITH THE APPELLANT, THE APPELLANT APPROACHED THE DEPARTMENT FOR COPY OF SAID DOCUMENTS. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPELLANT VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 24 AUGUST 2018 REQUESTED TO THE DEPARTMENT PROVIDE THE COPY OF ASSESSMENT NOTICE AND ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY LD. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BADDI. 7. THE APPELLANT RECEIVED THE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE AND ASSESSMENT ORDER ONLY ON 04 SEPTEMBER 2018. THEREAFTER THE APPELLANT IMMEDIATELY APPROACHED A CONSULTANT AND HIRED HIM TO FILE THE APPEAL. THE APPELLANT PROVIDED THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO THE CONSULTANT HIRED ON 08 SEPTEMBER 2018 FOR FILING THE APPEAL. 4 ITA NOS. 14 59 TO 1461/CHD/2018 M/S VYANKTESH PACKA GING, DISTT. SOLAN 8. HOWEVER, WHEN THE APPELLANT CONTACTED THE CONSULTANT FOR THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF APPEAL ON 03.10.2018, THE CONSULTANT INFORMED THAT DUE TO PRESSURE OF INCOME TAX AUDIT AND RETURNS, HE COULD NOT FILE THE APPEAL AS PER THE AGREED TIME FRAME. 9. THEREAFTER THE APPELLANT HAD NO CHOICE OTHER THAN TO, IMMEDIATELY ENGAGE ANOTHER COUNSEL FOR FILING THE APPEAL. DUE TO THESE PROCEEDINGS THE APPLICANT WAS NOT ABLE TO FILE THE APPEAL IN TIME AND THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL HAS CAUSED. THERE WAS NO INTENTIONAL DELAY ON THE PART OF THE APPELLANT. 10. THAT THE APPLICANT IS VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL, THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL WAS NOT INTENTIONAL. THAT THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION, ANANTNAG AND ANOTHER VS. MST. KATIJI AND OTHERS 1987(28) E.L.T. 185 HAS LAID DOWN THE PRINCIPAL OF LIBERAL APPROACH FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. IT WAS OBSERVED THAT LITIGANT DOES NOT STAND TO BENEFIT BY LODGING APPEAL LATE. REFUSING TO CONDONE DELAY CAN RESULT IN A MERITORIOUS MATTER BEING THROWN OUT AT THE VERY THRESHOLD AND CAUSE OF JUSTICE BEING DEFEATED. 11. THAT IN VIEW OF THE UNINTENTIONAL AND NON- DELIBERATE DELAY, THE DELAY MAY BE CONDONED FOR THE CAUSE OF JUSTICE. THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IS REQUESTED TO CONDONE THE DELAY OF 500 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL AND MAY HEAR THE APPLICATION ON MERITS. THE A SUFFER IRREPARABLE LOSS IN CASE THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL IS NOT CONDONED. 12. IN THE VIEW OF ABOVE, THIS APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS HUMBLY REQUESTED TO CONDONE THE SAID 5 ITA NOS. 14 59 TO 1461/CHD/2018 M/S VYANKTESH PACKA GING, DISTT. SOLAN DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL AND TO HEAR THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 3. ALL THE APPLICATIONS ARE SUPPORTED WITH AFFIDAVI TS OF SHRI ANAND BANGUR, PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. 4. A PERUSAL OF THE AVERMENTS MADE IN THE APPLICATI ON REVEALS THAT THERE WAS A MAJOR FIRE INCIDENT IN THE FACTORY PREM ISES OF THE APPELLANT. COPY OF THE FIR HAS ALSO BEEN PRODUCED ON THE FILE IN THIS RESPECT. THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE / APPELLANT WAS SHUT DOWN AT BADDI AND FURTHER THE MATTER OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO TRANSFERRED FRO M CIT(A), SHIMLA TO CIT(A), FARIDABAD. SINCE THE BUSINESS PREMISES AT B ADDI WAS SHUT DOWN, HENCE, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY OF TH E NOTICES OF HEARING. THE ASSESSEE HAS FULLY EXPLAINED ALL THE EVENTS AS REPRODUCED ABOVE RELATING TO DELAY IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL. 5. CONSIDERING THE AVERMENTS MADE AND ALSO THE FACT S AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN OUR VIEW, INTEREST OF JUSTICE WILL BE MET IF THE DELAY IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEALS IS CONDONED SUBJECT TO PAYMENT OF COST OF RS. 5,000/- IN RESPECT OF EACH OF THE APPEA L. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THE COST IMPOSED BE DEPOSITED IN THE P RIME MINISTERS NATIONAL RELIEF FUND. 6. ON MERITS, AS NOTED ABOVE, THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) IS AN EX-PARTE ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY EXPLAINED THE CIRC UMSTANCES IN ITS 6 ITA NOS. 14 59 TO 1461/CHD/2018 M/S VYANKTESH PACKA GING, DISTT. SOLAN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY BECAUSE OF WHI CH THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. SINCE ON SIMILAR REASONING, WE HAVE CONDO NED THE DELAY, HENCE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF T HE CIT(A) IS HEREBY SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR DECISION AFRESH. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE WILL PROMPTLY APP EAR, AS AND WHEN CALLED FOR BY THE LD. CIT(A). FURTHER, IT IS D IRECTED THAT BEFORE COMMENCEMENT OF THE HEARING, THE ASSESSEE WILL PROD UCE THE EVIDENCE OF DEPOSIT OF COST AMOUNT IN THE PRIME MINISTERS NATI ONAL RELIEF FUND, AS ORDERED ABOVE, WITH A COPY OF THE SAME TO THE REGIS TRY OF THE ITAT FOR INFORMATION. IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IF ASSESSEE FAIL TO DEPOSIT THE AMOUNT IN PRIME MINISTERS NATIONAL RELIEF FUND, THE LD. C IT(A) WILL NOT ADMIT THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE. SUBJECT TO ABOVE OBSERVATIONS / DIRECTIONS, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PUR POSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20.12.2019. SD/- SD/- ( . . / N.K. SAINI) ( ! ' / SANJAY GARG) #$% / VICE PRESIDENT &' / JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 20.12.2019 .. 7 ITA NOS. 14 59 TO 1461/CHD/2018 M/S VYANKTESH PACKA GING, DISTT. SOLAN 2*&)3454) / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. '$ / THE APPELLANT 2. &' '$ / THE RESPONDENT 3. , 6) / CIT 4. , 6) ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. 47 &)8 , . 8 , 9:;< / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. ;= - / GUARD FILE 2 , / BY ORDER, > / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR