Aparna Fabs, CHENNAI V. ITO, Coimbatore

ITA 1797/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7761 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 15-12-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 14-06-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUPRIYO PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: B GOWTHAMAN
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO. 1797 /MDS/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR :20 11 - 1 2 M/S. APARNA FABS, 942, CROSS CUT ROAD, GANDHIPURAM, COIMBATORE 641 012. [PAN: A A FF A 9134L ] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD II (1) , C OIMBATORE . ( / A PPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI B. GOWTHAMAN, C.A. / RESPONDENT BY : S HRI SUPRIYO PAL , J CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 1 5 . 12 .201 6 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEME NT : 28 . 12 .201 6 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER : TH I S APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 2, COIMBATORE DATED 30.03.2016 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 011 - 12. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED MANY GROUNDS IN ITS APPEAL, BUT THE MAIN ISSUE IS WITH REGARD TO CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND ITS ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A FIR M ENGAGED IN TEXTILE BUSINESS AND FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 24.09.2011 ADMITTING I.T.A. NO . 1797/ M/ 1 6 2 INCOME OF .3,34,740/ - . THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [ ACT IN SHORT]. THEREAFTER, THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED. IN RESPONS E THERETO, THE ASSESSEE S AR APPEARED AND FILED ALL DETAILS AS CALLED FOR. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND VERIFICATION OF DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 25.03.2014 BY AS SESSING TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT .1,79,95,410/ - BY HOLDING THAT THE ENTIRE SUNDRY CREDITORS TO THE TUNE OF .1,76,60,668/ - , AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GENUINE. 3. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVER, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS FO UND TO HAVE BEEN FILED LATE BY 145 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE BELATED APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY CONDONATION PETITION. WHEN THE DELAY WAS NOTIFIED TO THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE FILED CONDONATION PETITION FOR THE DELAY. SINCE THE LD. CIT(A) DO NOT FIND ANY STRONG REASON FOR FILING THE APPEAL WITH SUCH LONG DELAY, HE REJECTED THE CONDONATION PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL. 4. ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL. BY FILING AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE PARTNER OF THE FIRM, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ONE OF THE PARTNERS OF THE FIRM, WHO WAS ALONE LOOKING I.T.A. NO . 1797/ M/ 1 6 3 AFTER THE FIRM S FINANCIAL MATTERS, WAS SICK AND UNDER PROLONGED MEDICAL TREATMENT. MO REOVER, THE OTHER PARTNERS OF THE FIRM WERE FULLY INVOLVED IN ORGANIZING FINANCE FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE ADVANCE TAX AS DEMANDED BY THE DEPARTMENT. THEREFORE, THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL WAS NEITHER WILLFUL NOR WANTON AND PLEADED THAT NECESSARY DIRECTION MAY KINDLY BE GIVEN TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, BY RELYING ON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF AJMEER SHERRIFF & CO. V. ITO 375 ITR 15(MAD), THE LD. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL CANNOT BE CONDONED ON THE GROUND THAT ONE OF THE PARTNERS OF FIRM WAS ILL AND SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. ADMITTEDLY, THERE WAS A DELAY OF 145 DAY S IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). BEFORE US, BY FILING AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE PARTNER OF THE FIRM, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ONE OF THE PARTNERS OF THE FIRM WAS SICK AND UNDER PROLONGED MEDICAL TREATMENT ALONG WITH MEDICA L CERTIFICATE DATED 15.02.2015 . ON PERUSAL OF THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT GIVEN ANY FINDING AS TO WHETHER ANY MEDICAL CERTIFICATE WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE PETITION FILED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. WE ALSO FIND FORCE IN THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD. DR THAT THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL CANNOT BE CONDONED ON THE GROUND THAT ONE OF THE PARTNERS OF FIRM WAS ILL. BUT, WE FIND THAT SINCE THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL I.T.A. NO . 1797/ M/ 1 6 4 JUSTICE DEMANDED AND PRAGMATIC APPROACH IS REQU IRED TO BE APPLIED, WHEN ONE OF THE PARTNERS WHO WERE UNDER PROLONGED MEDICATION, BEING A FEMALE, IS WHETHER CLOSELY RELATED OR ONE OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM PARTNERS AND LOOKING AFTER THE INCOME TAX/FINANCIAL MATTERS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. ACCORDINGLY, WE REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE OF CONDONATION OF DELAY AND ADMISSION OF APPEAL AFRESH AFTER MAKING SUITABLE ENQUIRIES AS OBSERVED HEREINABOVE BY GIVING SUITABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. SINCE WE HAVE REMITTED THE ISSUE OF CONDONATION OF DELAY FOR ADMISSION OF APPEAL TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A), THE OTHER GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO ADJUDICATED AT THIS JUNCTURE. 7 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED F OR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 28 TH DECEMBER , 201 6 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - (CHANDRA POOJARI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 28 . 12 .201 6 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / A PPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.