Dr. Deepak Lamech, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1528/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 68863 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 28-10-2013
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: V P THANGADURAI
• Keywords: Bonafide belief; Condonation of delay; Bonafide mistake
• Section: 143(3); 153A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1528/MDS/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09) DR. DEEPAK LAMECH, M/S.SUBBARAYA AIYAR PADMANABHAN & RAMAMANI ADVOCATES, 75A, DR.RADHAKRISHNAN SALAI, MYLAPORE, CHENNAI-600 004. PAN: AAACT1261F VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-IV(3), CHENNAI-600 034. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MR. V.P.THANGADURAI, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : MR. GURU BASHYAM, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 28 TH OCTOBER, 2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 TH NOVEMBER, 2013 O R D E R PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JM : THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE O RDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I, CHENNAI DATED 09.05.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. THE GRI EVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHOWN SUFFICIENT C AUSE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 939 DAYS IN FILING THE APP EAL. ITA NO.1528/MDS//2013 2 2. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT ASSESS MENTS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2008-09 WERE COMPLETED IN ASSESSEES CASE UNDER SECTION 153A REA D WITH SECTION 153C READ WITH SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 24.12.2009. THE COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE F ILED APPEALS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2007-08 BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ON 23.01.2 010. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE ASSES SEE WAS UNDER THE BONAFIDE IMPRESSION THAT THE APPEALS WERE FILED FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS I.E. FROM 2002-03 TO 2008- 09 AS THE ISSUES IN ALL THESE APPEALS ARE COMMON AND IN FACT IN THE STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BEF ORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), IT WAS MENTIO NED THAT THE APPEALS ARE FILED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2008-09. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) PASSED AN ORDE R FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2007-08 ON 24.08.20 12 AND RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 28.08.2012. THE COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE APPROACHED THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND VERIFIED A S TO ITA NO.1528/MDS//2013 3 WHAT HAPPENED TO THE APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 09, THE ASSESSEE CAME TO KNOW THAT NO SUCH APPEAL W AS FILED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AND THE APPEALS WER E FILED ONLY FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2007-08. R EALIZING THE MISTAKE, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE TH E COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEAR 2008-09 THUS CAUSING A DELAY OF 939 DAYS. THE COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT DELAY IN FILING OF THIS APPEAL IS NEIT HER WILLFUL NOR WANTON BUT ONLY DUE TO BONAFIDE IMPRESSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED APPEALS FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS I.E. 2002-03 TO 2008-09. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STATING THAT WHAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ONLY FACTS AND NO REASON WAS GIVEN FO R THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL. THE COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS NOT JUSTIFI ED IN REJECTING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THE APPEA L FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 WAS NOT FILED ON A BONAFIDE BELIEF THAT THE SAME WAS FILED ALONG WITH THE APPEALS FOR 2002-03 TO 2007-08. ITA NO.1528/MDS//2013 4 3. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORTS THE ORD ER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IN REJECTI NG THE CONDONATION OF DELAY AND NOT ADMITTING THE APPEAL. 4. HEARD BOTH SIDES. PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWE R AUTHORITIES AND AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEF ORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) EXPLAINING THE REASONS AS TO WHY THE APPEAL COULD NOT BE FILED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 ALONG WITH THE APPEALS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2007-08. ON GOING THRO UGH THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE OPIN ION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD GIVEN SUFFICIENT REASON AND CAUSE AS T O WHY HE COULD NOT FILE THE APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 008-09. THE ASSESSEE HAVING FILED THE APPEALS FOR THE ASSES SMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2007-08, WE COULD NOT FIND ANY REA SON AS TO WHY HE COULD NOT FILE THE APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2008-09 BUT FOR THE BONAFIDE MISTAKE OF THE ASSESSE E, HAVING MENTIONED IN THE STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL THAT APPEALS WERE FILED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 20 02-03 TO 2008-09. ASSESSEE ONLY FAILED TO SUBMIT FORM NO. 35 FOR THE ITA NO.1528/MDS//2013 5 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AND THE GROUNDS RAISED ARE COMMON FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS FROM 2002-03 TO 2008- 09. 5. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE RESTORE THIS APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR CO NDONING THE DELAY OF 939 DAYS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, AND ADMIT THE APPEAL AND DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERITS, AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON MONDAY, THE 18 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI. DATED THE 18 TH NOVEMBER, 2013. SOMU COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (4 ) CIT(A) (2) RESPONDENT (5 ) D.R. (3) CIT (6 ) G.F.