, , , , , , ,, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : KOLKATA [ . . . . . . . . , ,, , , ,, , . . . . . .. . ! ! ! ! , ' ' ' ' ] [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI B. R. MITTAL, JM & HONBLE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, AM] #$ #$ #$ #$ / I.T.A NO. 1533/KOL/2010 %& '() %& '() %& '() %& '()/ // / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 RAJENDRA KUMAR SARAOGI -VS.- TAX RECOVERY OFFICER-36(AO) KOLKATA [PAN : AKUPS 5241 B] KOLKATA. [ +, +, +, +, /APPELLANT ] ]] ] [ ./+, ./+, ./+, ./+,/ // / RESPONDENT ] ]] ] +, +, +, +, / FOR THE APPELLANT : SHRI SOMNATH GHOSH ./+, ./+, ./+, ./+, / FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI P. S. DUTTA 0 /ORDER . . . . . .. . ! ! ! ! , ' ' ' ' PER S. V. MEHROTRA, A. M. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-XX, KOLKATA DATED 22.09.2010. 2. AS PER OFFICE NOTE THE APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 213 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY U/S. 253(5) OF THE ACT WHE REIN IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT THE APPEAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED ON OR BEFORE 03.01.2010 AS THE LD. CIT(A)S ORDER WAS RECEIVED ON 04.11.2009. IT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT THAT ON OR ABOUT 2 ND WEEK OF DECEMBER, 2009, THE ASSESSEE FELL SEVERELY ILL AND HAD TO BE BED RIDDEN FOR A NUMBER OF DAYS. SUBS EQUENTLY, HIS CONDITION BECAME WORSE AGAIN WHEN HE WAS DIAGNOSED HEPATITIS. HE WAS ADVISED BED REST BY DR. C.R. KUNDU. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED MEDICAL REPORTS WHICH ARE OF FOLLOWING DATES :- 23.12.2009, 22.01.2010, 22.02.2010, 14.04.2010, 12 .05.2010 & 15.06.2010. THEREAFTER, ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL ON 04.08.2010. ITA NO. 1533/KOL/20 10 2 3. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE ARE OF THE OP INION THAT ON ACCOUNT OF SERIOUS ILLNESS, ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE FROM FIL ING APPEAL IN TIME AND, THEREFORE, WE CONDONE THE DELAY. 4. LD. COUNSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT BECAUSE OF ILLNESS, ASSESSEE COULD NOT MAKE EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND, THEREFORE, ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANT IATE HIS CLAIM. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE RECORDS OF THE CASE. WE FIND THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, ASS ESSING OFFICER HAS GIVEN VARIOUS INSTANCES OF NON-COMPLIANCE AND HAS ALSO ISSUED SHOW CAUSE NOTIC E FOR INITIATING PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(B) OF THE ACT. THE CASE WAS FINALLY ADJOURNED TO 24.12.2007 B UT NONE APPEARED. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, ASSESSING OFFICER HAD PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER O N THE BASIS OF ONLY MEAGER DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE, IN ORDER TO IMPART S UBSTANTIAL JUSTICE TO THE ASSESSEE, WE SET ASIDE TH E ORDER TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR PASSING THE ORDER DENOVO. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRE CTED TO COOPERATE WITH THE DEPARTMENT IN COMPLETING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING. HOWEVER, IF ASSES SEE DOES NOT COOPERATE, THEN ASSESSING OFFICER WILL BE FREE TO PASS THE ORDER AS PER MATER IAL AVAILABLE WITH HIM. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 0 0 0 0 '1 '1 '1 '1 2 1% 3 4 2 1% 3 4 2 1% 3 4 2 1% 3 4 5' 5' 5' 5' ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 13. 07. 2011. SD/- SD/- [ . . . . . . . . , ,, , ] [ . . . . . .. . ! ! ! ! , ' ' ' ' ] [ B. R. MITTAL ] [ S.V. MEHROTRA ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( (( (5' 5' 5' 5') )) ) DATED : 13 TH JULY, 2011. ITA NO. 1533/KOL/20 10 3 0 8 .9 :9(/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. +, /APPELLANT- RAJENDRA KUMAR SARAOGI, 6B, DR. RAJEN DRA PRASAD SARANI, (CLIVE ROW), KOL KATA-700 001. 2 ./+, / RESPONDENT : TAX RECOVERY OFFICER-36(AO), 18, RAB INDRA SARANI, KOLKATA, 3. 0%/ THE CIT, 4. 0% ()/ THE CIT(A), KOLKATA. 5. '3 .%/ DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA [/9 ./ TRUE COPY ] 0%1/ BY ORDER , #A /ASSTT REGISTRAR [KKC 'BC %DA E' /SR.PS]