Easwaran & Sons Engineers Ltd., CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1627/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9358 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 08-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: R VIJAYARAGHAVAN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO. 1 627 /MDS/2015 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006 - 07 M/S. EASWARAN & SONS ENGINEERS LTD., NO. VI FLOOR, TEMPLE TOWER, 827, ANNA SALAI, NANDANAM, CHENNAI 600 015. [PAN: A AACE1363P ] VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX , CORPORATE WARD 2 ( 1 ) , CHENNAI 600 034. ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI R. VIJAYARAGHAVAN , ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SASIKUMAR, J CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 0 9 . 0 2 .201 6 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 10 . 0 5 .201 6 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) I V , CHENNAI , DATED 0 1 . 1 0 .20 1 4 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 . 2. T HE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS FOUND TO HAVE BEEN FILED LATE BY 173 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. T O CONDONE THE DELAY OF 173 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL, IN THE AFFIDAVIT TH E ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED AS UNDER: I.T.A. NO . 1627 /M/ 15 2 1. I AM THE DIRECTOR OF THE ABOVE COMPANY AND AM FULLY AWARE OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH HAVE RESULTED IN DELAY IN FILING THE ABOVE APPEAL. 2. I STATE THAT THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL S) DATED 01.10.2014 PASSED U/S.143(3) WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ON 24.11.2014 AND I AM NOW AWARE THAT THE APPEAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED ON OR BEFORE 23.01.2015. HOWEVER, THE APPEAL WAS ACTUALLY FILED ON 15.07.2015 RESULTING IN A DELAY OF 173 DAY S. 3. I STATE THAT AFTER RECEIPT OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE SAME WAS PLACED BEFORE ME FOR TAKING FURTHER STEPS. AS I WAS BUSY WITH MY INTERNAL WORK AND FORGOT TO TAKE FURTHER STEPS. FOR THE SAME ASST YEAR APPEAL IS PENDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAIN ST THE ORDER U/S.143(3) R.W.S 147. WHILE I MET OUR ADVOCATE M/S. SUBBARAYA AIYAR PADMANABHAN & RAMAMANI TO DISCUSS THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE IT AT , THEY ENQUIRED ABOUT THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE APPEAL AGAINST THE 143(3). WHILE I WAS SEARCHING T HE RECORDS REGARDING THE APPEAL AGAINST 143(3) ORDER I FOUND THAT NO APPEAL HAD BEEN FILED AGAINST THE 143(3) ORDER. THEN I BROUGHT IT TO THE NOTICE OF OUR COUNSEL AND THEY ADVISED US THAT WE HAVE TO FILE AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER PAS SED BY THE CIT(A) UNDER SECTION 143(3). WE GAVE THE PAPERS TO OUR ADVOCATES WHO HAVE PREPARED THE APPEAL AND WAS FILED BEFORE YOUR HONOUR. FOR THIS REASON THE APPEAL WAS FILED BELATEDLY BY 173 DAYS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 15.07.2015. HENCE, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL IS NEITHER DELIBERATE NOR WILLFUL. I.T.A. NO . 1627 /M/ 15 3 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE DELAY IS NEITHER WILFUL NOR WANTON AND BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, HE PRAYED THAT THE DELAY MAY BE CONDO NED AND ADMITS THE APPEAL FOR HEARING. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR HAS STRONGLY OBJECTED TO THE PLEA OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WITHOUT ANY REASONABLE CAUSE . 5. WE HAVE HE ARD BOTH SIDES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. IN THIS CASE, THERE IS A DELAY OF 173 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL AND NO SUFFICIENT CAUSE IS EMANATING FROM THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE TO CONDONE THE DELAY OF 173 DAYS. THE ONLY REASON MENTIONED IN THE PETITION THAT THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS BUSY WITH HIS INTERNAL WORK AND FORGOT TO TAKE FURTHER STEPS FOR FILING FURTHER APPEAL CANNOT BE SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO CONDON E THE DELAY OF 173 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. APART FROM THIS, THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MADHU DADHA V. ACIT [2009] 317 ITR 458, WHEREIN THE HON BLE HIGH COURT DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND CONFI RMED THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT TAKEN PROPER PLEA TO SHOW SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL . IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE SHEER NEGLIGENT ATTITUDE OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY CANNOT BE TAKEN C ARE TO PRESERVE THE RIGHT I.T.A. NO . 1627 /M/ 15 4 OF APPEAL SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHOWN SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DELAY OF 173 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, THE PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY FILED IN THE FORM OF AFFIDAVIT STAND S DISMISSED AND NOT ADMITTED FOR HEARING OF THE APPEAL FOR FURTHER ADJUDICATION. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 10 TH MAY , 201 6 AT C HENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 10 . 0 5 .201 6 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.