I.T.A. NO. 1774/KOL./2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-2006 PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA A BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1774/KOL/ 2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-2006 MRS. KABITA DAS (SAHA),............................ .........................APPELLANT 7/2, SHORT STREET, FLAT 4A, KOLKATA-700 017 [PAN : AJEPS 0855 N] -VS.- COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,........................ ..................RESPONDENT KOLKATA-XVII, 169, A.J.C. BOSE ROAD, KOLKATA-700 014 APPEARANCES BY: SHRI P.J. BHIDE, FCA AND DR. SOMNATH GHOSH, FCA , FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI M.K. BISWAS, JCIT, FOR THE DEPARTMENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : NOVEMBER 26, 2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : NOVEMBER 27, 2015 O R D E R PER SHRI P.M. JAGTAP :- THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-XVII DATED 11.1 2.2008 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS NOTED THAT THERE IS A DELAY OF 250 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THIS APPEAL BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL. IN THIS REGARD, THE ASSESESE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT OF HER CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR DELAY AS UNDER:- I.T.A. NO. 1774/KOL./2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-2006 PAGE 2 OF 4 6. THAT SOMETIME IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 2008, THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED A NOTICE BY THE CIT, KOLKATA- XVII U/S 263 OF THE ACT. SUCH PARTICULARS AS WERE REQUIR ED BY THE COMMISSIONER WERE DULY SUBMITTED BY ME WHEN APPEARED BEFORE HIM. THEREAFTER THE CIT, KOLKATA-XV II BY HIS ORDER DATED 11.12.2008 SET ASIDE THE AFORESA ID ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.12.2007. SUCH ORDER WAS PASSED BY THE CIT, KOLKATA-XVII U/S 263 OF THE ACT AND THAT THE SAID ORDER WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 16.12.2008. 7. THAT THE ASSESSEE THEREAFTER HANDED OVER TO ME A COPY OF THE SAID ORDER U/S 263. ON PERUSING THE SAM E I FOUND THAT THE LD. CIT, KOLKATA-XVII HAS SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) DATED 31.12.2007 WITH A DIRECTION FOR FRAMING A DE NOVO REASSESSMENT. I HAV ING LABOURED UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THERE IS NO FURT HER SCOPE OF ADDITION TO THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED IN T HE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, I THEREFORE ADVISED THE ASSESSEE SMT. KABITA DAS (SAHA) THAT NO FURTHER ACT ION BY WAY OF APPEAL ETC. WAS CALLED FOR. ACCORDINGLY T HE ASSESSEE SMT. KABITA DAS (SAHA) DID NOT PREFER APPE AL BEFORE THE HIGHER AUTHORITIES. 8. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID REFER THE MATTER TO THE VALUATION OFFICER, MUMBAI WHO ASKED F OR SOME PARTICULARS FROM THE ASSESSEE. THE SAME WERE D ULY FURNISHED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEREAFTER IN THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 2009 ISSUED NOTICE U/S.143(2)142 OF T HE ACT IN CONNECTION WITH THE ABOVE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THE MATTER WAS V ERY SERIOUS AND REFERRED TO SENIOR COLLEAGUES. 9. MY COLLEAGUES ADVISED THAT THE DIRECTION ISSUED BY THE LEARNED C.I.T. KOLKATA-XVII IN HIS ORDER PASSED U/S .263 WERE AGAINST THE LAW, THAT THERE IS NO PROVISION FO R ASSESSMENT OF ANY INCOME OF THE PURCHASER OF IMMOVA BLE PROPERTY CORRESPONDING TO SECTION 50C OF THE ACT, I WAS ADVISED THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD HAVE PREFERRED AN APPEAL TO THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SEEKING CANCELLATION/MODIFICATION OF THE SAID ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED C.I.T., KOLKATA-XVII U/S.263 OF THE ACT ON 11.12.2008. 10. THAT I REALIZED THE ERROR OF JUDGMENT ON MY PAR T AND FELT THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT SUFFER ON THI S ACCOUNT. THEREFORE AS ADVISED BY THE SENIOR COLLEAG UES, I TODAY ADVISE THE ASSESSEE TO PREFER AN APPEAL BEFOR E THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA AGAINST THE SAID I.T.A. NO. 1774/KOL./2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-2006 PAGE 3 OF 4 ORDER PASSED BY THE C.I.T., KOLKATA-XVII ON 11.12.2 008 WITH A PRAYER FOR CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING SUC H APPEAL. I STATE THAT THE DELAY IN FILING SUCH APPEA L BY MY CLIENT SMT. KABITA DAS (SAHA) IS ONLY DUE TO MY ERR OR OF JUDGMENT ON MY PART. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES ON THE ISSUE OF ASSESSEES APPLICATION SEEKING CONDONATION OF THE D ELAY IN FILING THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IT IS OBSERVED THAT A S IMILAR DELAY HAD OCCURRED IN THE CASE OF SHRI VIJAY V. MEGHANI VS.- DCIT (ITA NOS. 5418 & 5419/MUM/2011) AND AN AFFIDAVIT OF HIS CHARTERED A CCOUNTANT WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE GIVING THE SIMILAR REASONS FOR THE SAID DELAY AS GIVEN IN THE PRESENT CASE. THE TRIBUNAL, HOWEVER, DID NOT GI VE ANY CREDENCE TO THE SAID AFFIDAVIT AND REJECTING THE SAME, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN LIMINE AS BARRED BY LI MITATION. SINCE THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES INVOLVED IN THE CASE OF SHR I VIJAY V. MEGHANI ARE SIMILAR TO THE PRESENT CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, THE DE CISION RENDERED BY THE MUMBAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE SAID CASE VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 20.08.2014 SQUARELY APPLIES IN THE PRESENT CASE AND THIS POSITION IS NOT DISPUTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US. WE, THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOW THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF VIJAY V. MEGHA NI (SUPRA) AND DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE HOLDING THE S AME AS BARRED BY LIMITATION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON NOVEMBER 27, 2015. SD/- SD/- (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KOLKATA, THE 27 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2015 I.T.A. NO. 1774/KOL./2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-2006 PAGE 4 OF 4 COPIES TO : (1) MRS. KABITA DAS (SAHA), 7/2, SHORT STREET, FLAT 4A, KOLKATA-700 017 (2) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-XVII, 169, A.J.C. BOSE ROAD, KOLKATA-700 014 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-KOLKATA-XVII, KOLK ATA (4) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (5) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.