Smt. Nayana R Pathange, Mysore V. I.T.O., Mysore

ITA 1602/BANG/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 89903 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 16-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR P K SRIHARI
• Assessee Lawyers: V SRINIVASAN
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1602/BANG/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SMT. NAYANA R. PATHANGE, PROPX. ANURADHA ENTERPRISES, NO.1100-55/A, OPP. RAJKAMAL THEATRE, VINOBHA ROAD, MYSORE 570 001. PAN: ADMPN 7723J VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), MYSORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI V. SRINIVASAN, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : DR. P.K. SRIHARI, ADDL. CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 7.5.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 8.5.2015 O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL, AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE, IS D IRECTED AGAINST THE CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 29.5.2014. THE RELEVANT ASSE SSMENT YEAR IS 2008- 09. ITA NO.1602/BANG/2014 PAGE 2 OF 4 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED A NUMBER OF ISSUES IN HE R GROUNDS OF APPEAL. HOWEVER, THE SOLITARY ISSUE FOR OUR CONSID ERATION IS: WHETHER THE CIT (A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AS THE SAME WAS NOT WITHIN TIME? 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASES ARE AS FO LLOWS: THE ASSESSEE, AN INDIVIDUAL, FILED HER RETURN OF I NCOME FOR THE PERIOD UNDER DISPUTE ON 31.7.2008, ADMITTING AN INCOME OF RS.1,82,910/-. THE ASSESSMENT WAS, HOWEVER, CONCLUDED BY THE AO U/S 14 3(3) OF THE ACT ON 25.11.2010, ON A TOTAL TIME OF RS.3,40,710/- ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED, IN SPITE OF SUFFICIENT OPPORTU NITIES AFFORDED, TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCES FOR THE CREDITS IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT. 4. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE TOOK UP THE ISSUES WITH THE CIT (A). THE CIT (A) HAD, HOWEVER, DISMISSED THE APPEAL WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT T HERE IS DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFOR E US. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED, AMONG OTHERS, THAT AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY WAS DULY FILED BEFORE THE CIT (A) WHICH HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BEFORE THE FINALIZATION OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL. IT WAS, THEREFORE, PLEADED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT ( A) DESERVES TO BE QUASHED. THE LEARNED DR PRESENT WAS DULY HEARD. ITA NO.1602/BANG/2014 PAGE 3 OF 4 6. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIO NS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIALS ON RECORD. IT IS A FACT THAT TH ERE WAS A DELAY OF 13 DAYS IN PREFERRING AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A). IT APP EARS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY I N FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A). TO SUBSTANTIATE THE ASSESSEES CLAIM, THE LEARNED AR HAD PRODUCED A PHOTO-STAT COPY OF THE ASSESSEES APPLIC ATION FILED BEFORE THE CIT (A). 7. WE HAVE PERUSED THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION AND ALSO KEE PING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE IN VIEW, THE MATTER IS RESTORED ON THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) WITH A DIRECTION TO CONSIDER THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION FO R CONDONATION OF DELAY AND TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION IN THE ACCORDANCE WI TH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 8 TH DAY OF MAY , 2015 . SD/- SD/- ( JASON P. BOAZ ) ( GEORGE GEORGE K. ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBE R BANGALORE, DATED, THE 8 TH MAY , 2015 . /D S/ ITA NO.1602/BANG/2014 PAGE 4 OF 4 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR/ SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, BANGALORE.