Bikash Paul, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward - 51(3) , Kolkata

ITA 1789/KOL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9462 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 16-12-2019
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 29-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MANISH TIWARI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 139(1); 148

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 1789/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-2012 BIKASH PAUL 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA C(SMC) BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT I.T.A. NO. 1789/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-2012 BIKASH PAUL,....................................... ...........................................APPELLAN T PROP. OF PARADISE ELECTRONICS & PARADISE GOLD, R.C. NANDY PATH, B.T. ROAD, KHARDAH, KOLKATA-700117 [PAN: AFVPP9229G] -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER,................................ ......................................RESPONDENT WARD-51(3), KOLKATA, DS-2& 3, UTTARAPAN BUILDING, MANIKTALLA CIVIC CENTRE, ULTADANGA, KOLKATA-700054 APPEARANCES BY: SHRI MANISH TIWARI, FCA, FOR THE APPELLANT SHRI JAYANTA KHANRA, JCIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE RESPON DEN T DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : DECEMBER 16, 2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : JANUARY 08, 2020 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-15, KOLKATA DA TED 11.01.2017 PASSED EX-PARTE, WHEREBY HE DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS NOTED THAT THERE IS A DELAY OF 869 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THIS APPEAL FILED BE FORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN THIS REGARD, THE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED AN APPLICATION SEEKI NG CONDONATION OF THE SAID DELAY ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- (A) THAT I AM A VERY SENIOR CITIZEN OF 80 YEARS OF AGE AND SUFFERING FROM VARIOUS AGE RELATED AILMENTS LIKE KI DNEY RELATED PROBLEMS, HIGH BLOOD SUGAR AND HIGH BP. MY CONDITION IS NOT STABLE AND I FREQUENTLY ADMITTED TO HOSPITAL IN PAST. (B) THAT I VISIT DOCTORS & NURSING HOMES REGULARLY DURING THE LAST TWO AND HALF YEARS AND ALSO ADMITTED TO NURSIN G HOMES / HOSPITAL SEVERAL TIMES FOR TREATMENT OF VARIOUS AIL MENTS. ITA NO. 1789/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-2012 BIKASH PAUL 2 (C) THAT BECAUSE OF REGULAR HEALTH PROBLEMS I AM NO T IN A POSITION TO DO DAY-TO-DAY WORK AND ATTEND OFFICE ON REGULAR BASIS DUE TO WHICH APPEAL WAS NOT FILED ON TIME. (D) THAT AFTER GETTING SOME RELIEF FROM VARIOUS AIL MENTS I DISCUSSED THE MATTER WITH LEGAL EXPERT WHO ADVISED FILING OF APPEAL TO HON'BLE ITAT AGAINST THE SAID ADVERSE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(A). (E) THAT THE APPEAL DOCUMENTS WERE DRAFTED, FINALIZ ED, SIGNED AND THEN FILED BEFORE HON'BLE ITAT ON 29.07.2019. KEEPING IN VIEW THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE A S ABOVE, WHICH ARE DULY SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSE E AFFIRMING THE RELEVANT FACTS ON OATH, I AM SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS A SUFF ICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DELAY OF 869 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING T HIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. EVEN THE LD. D.R. HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJE CTION IN THIS REGARD. I, THEREFORE, CONDONE THE SAID DELAY AND PROCEED TO DI SPOSE OF THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERIT. 3. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS AN INDIVIDUA L, WHO IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF ELECTRONICS GOODS AND GOLD. THE RET URN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS FILED BY HIM DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.8,83,000/-. AS PER THE INFORMATION RECEIVED BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED A SHOP AT 58/48, B.T. RO AD, WARD NO. 7, KHARDAH, 24-PARGANAS (NORTH) AT A CONSIDERATION OF RS.29,97,600/- ON 08.06.2010 IN CASH. SINCE THIS INVESTMENT MADE BY T HE ASSESSEE WAS NOT REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE-SHEET FILED BY THE ASSESSE E WITH HIS RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER AND A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 WAS ISSUED BY HIM ON 02.01 .2014 AFTER RECORDING THE REASONS. ALTHOUGH THERE WAS NO IMMEDI ATE RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEES SIDE TO THE SAID NOTICE, A LETTER WA S FINALLY FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 03.12.2014 REQUESTING THAT THE RETURN F ILED ORIGINALLY UNDER SECTION 139(1) MAY BE TREATED AS THE RETURN FILED I N RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148. THEREAFTER THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 147/143(3) OF T HE ACT VIDE AN ORDER ITA NO. 1789/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-2012 BIKASH PAUL 3 DATED 26.12.2014 DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME OF TH E ASSESSEE AT RS.33,85,590/- AFTER MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS.25,02 ,508/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED IN VESTMENT ALLEGEDLY MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITUR E INCURRED ON STAMP DUTY. 4. AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R UNDER SECTION 147/143(3), AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND SINCE THERE WAS NO SATISFACTORY CO MPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED BY HIM FIXING THE SAID APPEAL FOR HEARING FROM TIME TO TIME, THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DIS MISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE HIS APPELLATE ORDER DATED 11.01.2 017 PASSED EX-PARTE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE ON THE PART O F THE ASSESSEE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FIXING THE A PPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR HEARING FROM TIME TO TIME DUE TO THE SAME REASO NS AS ADVANCED BY THE ASSESSEE WHILE EXPLAINING THE DELAY ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. SINCE THE SAID REA SONS ARE DULY SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSE SSEE WHEN HIS APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) . I, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) E X-PARTE AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO HIM FOR DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL OF T HE ASSESSEE AFRESH ON MERIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. AS UNDERTAKEN BY THE LD. COU NSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE SHALL MAKE DUE COMPLIANCE BEFORE THE L D. CIT(APPEALS) AND SHALL EXTEND ALL THE POSSIBLE COOPERATION IN ORDER TO ENABLE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL AFRESH EXPEDI TIOUSLY. ITA NO. 1789/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-2012 BIKASH PAUL 4 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TRE ATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON JANUARY 08, 2 020. SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) VICE-PR ESIDENT) KOLKATA, THE 8 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2020 COPIES TO : (1) SHRI BIKASH PAUL, PROP. OF PARADISE ELECTRONICS & PARADISE GOLD, R.C. NANDY PATH, B.T. ROAD, KHARDAH, KOLKATA-700117 (2) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-51(3), KOLKATA, DS-2& 3, UTTARAPAN BUILDING, MANIKTALLA CIVIC CENTRE, ULTADANGA, KOLKATA-700054 (3) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-15, K OLKATA; (4) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- , KOLKATA (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.