Orissa State Commercial Transport Corporation Ltd, Cuttack V. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Cuttack

ITA 199/CTK/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 19922114 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 02-08-2011
• Assessment Year: 1979-1980
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2010
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A BHATTACHARJEE
• Assessee Lawyers: SASWAT ACHARYA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE : SHRI K.K.GUPTA, AM , AND SHRI K.S.S.PRASAD RAO, JM ITA NO. 199,200, 201 AND 202/CTK/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR S 1979 - 80,1980 - 81,1981 - 82 AND 1983 - 84) ORISSA STATE COMMERCIAL TRA NSPORT CORP ORATINLTD., OLD SECRETARIATE,BUXI BAZAR, CUTTACK1 PAN: AAACO 8209 N VERSUS ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), CUTTACK. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI SASWAT ACHARYA, AR FOR THE RESPONDENT SHRI A.BHATTACHARJEE, DR DATE OF HEARING : 02.08.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.08.2011 ORDER PER BENCH : ALL THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVING BEEN AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1979 - 80,19 80 - 81,1981 - 82 AND 1983 - 84 IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. ISSUE BEING COMMON, ALL THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. IN ALL THESE APPEALS, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE ISSUE OF NON - CONDONATION OF DELAY BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDERS U/S.154 OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE DELAY OF 340 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS TO DUE TO RET ARD POSITION OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY AND DUE TO RED - TAPISM THE ASSESSEE GOT THE APPROVAL FROM THE GOVERNMENT TO FILE THE APPEAL. BUT THE LEARNED CIT(A) SUMMARILY REJECTED THE APPEALS FOR THE REASON OF BELATED FILING OF THE SAME IN UTTER DEROGATION OF THE MANDATE OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF COLLECTOR V. KATIJI REPORTED IN AIR 1987 SC 1353 AND OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF STATE OF ORISSA V. KANTILATA SARANGI 2008(II) OLR 942. ITA NO.199,200, 201 AND 202/CTK/2010 2 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE L EARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS REITERATED WHAT HAD BEEN SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) REGARDING THE DELAY AND CAUSE THEREOF IN PUTTING THE SIMPLE WAY OF PREVAILING RED - TAPISM AND RETARDLESS POSITION OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. THE COMMON PRINCIPLE IS THA T A MERITORIOUS APPEAL CANNOT BE DISMISSED ON THE THRESHOLD FOR NON - OBSERVATIONS OF PROCEDURAL LAW SUCH AS LIMITATION. THEREFORE, THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN DISMISSING THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE BY NOT CONDONING THE DELAY IS UNJU ST AND UNSUSTAINABLE FOR LEGAL SCRUTINY AND REQUIRES TO BE SET ASIDE. 5. CONTRARY TO THIS, THE LEARNED DR HAS VEHEMENTLY ARGUED SUPPORTING THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONTENDING INTER ALIA THAT THE ASSESSEE BEING A COMPANY IS HAVING VERY MUCH M AN POWER AND IT IS SUFFICIENT TO ATTEND THE ASPECT OF FILING OF APPEALS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). AS THE ASSESSEE IS NOT DILIGENT IN PREFERRING THE APPEALS IN TIME BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND THE REASONS FOR DELAY ARE NOT BEING SUBSTANTIATED, THE LEARNE D CIT(A) IS VERY MUCH RIGHT IN NOT CONDONING THE DELAY. THEREFORE, THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN NOT CONDONING THE DELAY AND THEREBY DISMISSED THE APPEALS IN LIMINE IS IN NO WAY INFIRMED AND REQUIRES NO INTERFERENCE. ACCORDINGLY, HE SOUGHT FOR DISMIS SAL OF THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. ON CAREFUL ANALYSIS OF THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IT IS FOUND THAT UNDISPUTEDLY THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS ONLY DUE TO DELAY IN OBTAINING SANCTION FROM THE CONCERNED APP ROPRIATE AUTHORITY BY THE ASSESSEE. SO THERE IS NO DELIBERATE AND CONSCIOUS ACT OF THE ASSESSEE IN DELAYING THE FILING OF THE APPEALS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). ON ANALYZING THIS UNDISPUTED FACTS IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE APEX COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF COLLECTOR V. KATIJI REPORTED IN AIR 1987 SC 1353 AND OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF STATE OF ITA NO.199,200, 201 AND 202/CTK/2010 3 ORISSA V. KANTILATA SARANGI 2008(II) OLR 942, IT IS FOUND THAT THE NON - CONDONATION OF THE DELAY PRAYED FOR BY THE ASSESSEE BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS NOT PROPER AND NOT SUSTAINABLE FOR LEGAL SCRUTINY. HENCE, THE ORDERS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) ARE HEREBY SET ASIDE AND THE APPEALS ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ON MERIT BEFORE HIM STRICTLY FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND PASS NECESSARY CONSEQUENTIAL ORDERS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AS PER LAW. 7. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/ - SD/ - (K.K.GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( K.S.S.PRASAD RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 12.08.2011 H.K.PADHEE, SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT: ORISSA STATE COMMERCIAL TRANSPORT CORPORATINLTD., OLD SECRETARIATE,BUXI BAZAR, CUTTACK1 2. THE RESPONDENT: ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), CUTTACK. 3. THE CIT, 4. THE CIT(A), 5. THE DR, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE (IN DUPLICATE) TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY.