Shri Bharatbhai Natwarlal Patel, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Wrad-10(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 1929/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8520 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 1989-1990
• Appeal Filed On: 29-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ILA PARMAR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 1929 /AHD/201 5 ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 1989 - 90 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM : PRAMOD KUMAR AM ] I.T.A. NO. 1929 /AHD/201 5 ASSESSMENT Y EAR : 1989 - 90 BHARAT NATVARLAL PATEL ....... ...........APPELLANT 29, BASANT BAHAR 1, BOPAL GHUMA ROAD, BOPAL, AHMEDABAD 380 058. [PAN : A CJPP 1375 Q ] VS. INCOME T AX OFFICER , WARD 10(2) , AHMEDABAD. ............................RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: H ARDIK VORA FOR THE APPELLANT ILA PARMAR FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 24 .08 .2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 19 .09 . 2017 O R D E R 1. TH IS APPEAL, FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31 ST MARCH 2015, PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A), IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 14 4 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1989 - 90, SUMMARILY DISMISSING APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPEAL WAS BELATED AND THAT IT WAS NOT A FIT CASE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. 2. TO ADJUDICATE ON THIS APPEAL ONLY A FEW M ATERIAL FACTS NEED TO BE TAKEN NOTE OF. THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT WAS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER ON 17.05.2010 , THOUGH THE ASSESSEE IS STATED TO HAVE RECEIVED IT, ON 08.10.2013, ALONG WITH LETTER D A TED 04.10.2013 FROM TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, RANGE - 10, AH MEDABAD . THERE IS NO DISPUTE ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE TRO DID GIVE THE ASSESSEE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, BUT CASE O F TH E I.T.A. NO. 1929 /AHD/201 5 ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 1989 - 90 PAGE 2 OF 2 CIT(A) IS TH A T SINCE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE, THROUGH AFFIX T URE ON 01.06 .2010 AS PER INSPECTOR S REPORT AND PANCHNAM A, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS BELATED. THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS FURTHER OF THE VIEW THAT IT WAS ANYWAY NOT A FIT CASE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED AND IS IN APPEAL BEFORE ME. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE R IVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 4. I SEE MERITS IN THE PLEA OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL. THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS GIVEN BY THE TRO IS NOT IN DIS PUTE, AND EVEN IF ASSESSMENT ORDER CAN BE TREATED AS HAVING BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE THROUGH AFFIXTURE, THAT FACT, BY ITSELF, CONSTITUTES A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR DE LAY IN FILING OF APPEAL. IN M Y CONSIDERED VIEW, THE LEARNED C IT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONDONED THE DELAY AND PROCEED TO DEAL WITH THE M AT TER ON MERITS. I, THEREFORE, CONDONE THE DEL A Y AND REMIT THE M AT TER TO THE FILE OF LEARNED C IT(A) FOR FR E SH ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN THE ABOVE TE RM . PR O NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 19 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2017. SD/ - PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: AHMEDABAD, THE 19 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER , 2017. COPIES TO : (1) THE APPEL LANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD