V.Murugesan, Madurai V. ITO Non Corporate Ward 2(4), CHENNAI

ITA 1652/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8004 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 14-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K HARI GOVIND
• Assessee Lawyers: B SIVARAMAN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Set aside
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

, / , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C SMC BENCH, CHENNAI ... , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1652/CHNY/2018 ' #$' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SHRI V. MURUGESAN, NO.2/275, SHANTHA ILLAM, THUMBAIPATTI POST, MELU TALUK, MADURAI 625 108. PAN : AIEPM 9898 E V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4), NO.2, V.P. RATHINASAMY NADAR ROAD, BIBIKULAM, MADURAI 625 002. (&'/ APPELLANT) (()&'/ RESPONDENT) &' * + / APPELLANT BY : SHRI B. SIVARAMAN, ADVOCATE ()&' * + / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K. HARI GOVIND, JCIT , # * -. / DATE OF HEARING : 10.07.2019 /0$ * -. / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.07.2019 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -2, MADURAI, D ATED 22.02.2018 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. SHRI B. SIVARAMAN, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE, SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS A DELAY OF 697 DAYS IN FILING THE AP PEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE CI T(APPEALS) FAILED TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL. ACCORD ING TO THE LD. 2 I.T.A. NO.1652/CHNY/18 COUNSEL, THE ASSESSEE FILED PETITION UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT') FOR RECTIFICATION ON 27.04.2015. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED ON 26.03.2015. THE RECTIFICATION PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 154 OF T HE ACT WAS REJECTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 15.05.2015. ADMITTEDLY, THERE AFTER THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEA LS) REJECTED THE APPEAL BY NOT CONDONING THE DELAY OF 697 DAYS IN FI LING THE APPEAL BEFORE HIM. BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THIS TRIB UNAL IN SUPPLY CHAIN CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. V. ITO IN I.T.A. NO.420/CHNY/ 2019 DATED 07.06.2019, THE LD.COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT ON IDENTI CAL CIRCUMSTANCES, WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS PROSECUTING REMEDIES UNDER SE CTION 154 OF THE ACT, THIS TRIBUNAL FOUND THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE WA S PROSECUTING REMEDIES BEFORE OTHER FORUM, THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) WITHIN THE PRESCRIBE D TIME. ACCORDINGLY, THIS TRIBUNAL CONDONED THE DELAY. IN THIS CASE ALS O, ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE FACTS ARE IDENTICAL, THEREFORE, THE DE LAY OF 697 DAYS MAY BE CONDONED AND THE APPEAL MAY BE RESTORED ON THE FILE OF THE CIT(APPEALS). 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI K. HARI GOVIND, THE LD. DE PARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT 697 DAYS IS A LONG D ELAY OF ABOUT TWO YEARS. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS TO EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME. 3 I.T.A. NO.1652/CHNY/18 4. HAVING HEARD SHRI B. SIVARAMAN, THE LD.COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI K. HARI GOVIND, THE LD. D.R., THIS TRIBUNA L FINDS THAT THERE IS A REASONABLE CAUSE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN NOT FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED MISCELLANEOUS PETITION UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RECTIFICAT ION. AFTER THE PETITION FILED WAS REJECTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE AS SESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). IN THE MEANTIME, THERE WA S A DELAY OF 697 DAYS. THE VERY FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED MISCEL LANEOUS PETITION UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT AND PROSECUTING THE SAME BEF ORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER SINCERELY AND DILIGENTLY SHOWS THAT THE ASS ESSEE IS TAKING CONTINUOUS STEPS. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF T HE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE ON THE PART OF TH E ASSESSEE IN NOT FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). ON IDEN TICAL CIRCUMSTANCES, THIS TRIBUNAL IN SUPPLY CHAIN CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. (SUPRA) CONDONED THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) IS SET ASIDE AND THE DELAY OF 6 97 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) IS HEREBY CONDONED. NOW THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS RESTORED ON THE FILE O F THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEALS) IS DIRECTED TO DISPOSE THE APPEAL ON MERIT AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 4 I.T.A. NO.1652/CHNY/18 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 18 TH JULY, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( ... ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 2 /DATED, THE 18 TH JULY, 2019 KRI. * (-34 54$- /COPY TO: 1. &' /APPELLANT 2. ()&' /RESPONDENT 3. , 6- () /CIT(A)-2, MADURAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-1, MADURAI 5. 4#7 (- /DR 6. 8' 9 /GF.