Gampa Mallesham, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1850/Hyd/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1545 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 12-06-2019
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NILANJAN DEY
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMA RAO
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B ', HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1850 / HYD/201 7 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 08 - 09 GAMPA MALLESHAM, HYDERABAD. PAN A CAPG 1850C VS. INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1) , HYDERABAD. A PPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY: S H RI S. RAMA RAO REVENUE BY: SHRI NILANJAN DEY DATE OF HEARING: 12 / 0 6 / 201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 14 / 0 6 /201 9 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN , AM: T H IS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 1 , HYDERABAD , DATED, 03 /0 7 /201 7 FOR AY 20 08 - 09 . 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE, THE ASSESSEE , AN INDIVIDUAL CARRYING ON BUSINESS AS A C&F AGENT FOR TWO PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES, FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY 20 08 - 09 ON 30 / 0 9 /20 08 DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 4,65,862 / - SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS AND ACCORDINGLY, NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) WAS ISSUED ON 1 7 /08/20 09 AND THE SAME WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE ON 20/08 /20 09 . ANOTHER NOTICE WAS ISSUED POS TING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 17/05/2010, AGAINST WHICH, THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE FILED THE REQUIRED INFORMATION AS CALLED FOR. I.T.A. NO. 1850 /HYD/1 7 GAMPA MALLESHAM, HYDERABAD. 2 2.1 THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 30/12/2010, DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 14,78,464/ - BY MAKING THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS: A) DISALLOWANCE FROM OUT OF TOUR AND TRAVELLING EXPENSES - RS. 17,982/ - B) CASH CREDITS TREATED AS INCOME BY APPLYING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT RS. 7,32,815/ - C) ESTIMATION OF RENTAL INCOME FROM PROPERTY BEARING NO. 1 - 3 - 176/35/22/4, GANDHI NAGAR, HYD. RS. 60,000/ - . 3. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF AO, THE ASSESSEE PREF ERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), WHO DISMISSED THE APPEAL AS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY OBSERVING THAT THE APPEAL WAS NOT PRESENTED WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME AND THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY VALID PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY EVEN AFTER SUBSTANTIAL PERIOD OF TIME AND NO SUFFICIENT AND REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT PRESENTING THE APPEAL WITHIN TIME HAS COME ON RECORD. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE LEARNED COMMISS IONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THERE WAS NO VALID PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELA Y . 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISPOSING OF THE APP EAL WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT TO EXPLAIN THE DEFICIENC Y IN THE CONDONATION P ETITION. 3. THE APPELLANT RESERVES HIS RIGHT TO ADD, AMEND, DELETE OR SUBSTITUTE ANY GROUND OR GROUNDS DURING THE COURSE F HEARING. 5. CONSIDERED THE RIVA L SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL BY NOT ADMITTING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE HIM WITH A DELAY OF 204 DAYS , FOR WHICH ACCORDING TO THE CIT(A), THERE WAS NO VALID PETITION FILED FOR THE CONDONATION OF I.T.A. NO. 1850 /HYD/1 7 GAMPA MALLESHAM, HYDERABAD. 3 DELAY WITHIN TIME. WE NOTICED THAT THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE F ILED AN AFFIDAVIT BEFORE THE CIT(A) AFFIRMING, INTER - ALIA, THEREIN THAT THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY ARE SUBMITTED IN THE PETITION REQUESTING FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY ANNEXED TO THIS AFFIDAVIT. IN FACT, HE FAILED TO ATTACH THE CONDONATION PETITION TO THE AFFIDAVIT. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED THE CONDONATION PETITION PROPERLY. AT THE SAME TIME, IN OUR OPINION, CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE GIVEN OPPORTUNIT Y TO RECTIFY THE ABOVE MISTAKE, WHICH IS CURABLE. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO GIVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO FILE CONDONATION PETITION AFRESH AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE SAME AD MIT THE APPEAL FOR HEARING AND TO ADJUDICAT E OF THE SAME ON MERITS , AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH JUNE, 2019. SD/ - ( P. MADHAVI DEVI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/ - ( S. RIFAUR RAHMAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 14 T H JUNE , 201 9. KV COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. GAMPA MALLESHAM, H.NO. 1 - 3 - 183/40/21/23, SAI RAJA RESIDENCY, P&T COLONY, GANDHINAGAR, HYDERABAD 500 0 8 0 . 2 . ITO, WARD 4(1) , INCOME - TAX TOWERS, AC GUARDS, HYDERABAD. 3 . CIT (A) 1, HYDERABAD. 4. PR. CIT - 1 , HYDERABAD 5. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6. GUARD FILE