Bricks N Stones Builders, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Hyderabad

ITA 2026/Hyd/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5976 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-05-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 23-05-2018
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 06-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GEETENDER MANN
• Assessee Lawyers: K A SAI PRASAD
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA NOS 2025 TO 2027 OF 2017 BRICKS N STONES BUILDERS HYDERABAD. PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.2025 TO 2027/HYD/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2011-12 & 2012-13) M/S. BRICKS N STONES BUILDERS, HYDERABAD PAN: AAIFB1906C VS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(3) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI K.A. SAI PRASAD FOR REVENUE : SMT. GEETENDER MANN, DR O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. ALL ARE ASSESSEES APPEALS AGAINST THE ORDERS OF TH E CIT (A)-12, HYDERABAD DATED 18.09.2017 FOR THE A.YS 201 1-12 & 2012-13 RESPECTIVELY. IN ALL THESE APPEALS, THE ASS ESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) IN REFUSING C ONDONATION OF DELAY AND DECLINING TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUES ON MER ITS. 2. THE APPEALS IN ITA NOS.2025 AND 2027/HYD/2017 AR E THE APPEALS AGAINST THE ASSESSMENTS COMPLETED U/S 1 43(3) OF THE ACT, WHILE THE APPEAL IN ITA NO.1026/HYD/2017 IS AG AINST THE ORDER U/S 271B OF THE ACT. THE COMMON AND ONLY REAS ON GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR FILING OF THE APPEALS BEFORE THE C IT (A) WITH A DELAY OF NEARLY TWO YEARS AND MORE IS THAT THE RELE VANT DATE OF HEARING: 23.05.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 2 5 . 0 5 .2018 ITA NOS 2025 TO 2027 OF 2017 BRICKS N STONES BUILDERS HYDERABAD. PAGE 2 OF 4 ASSESSMENT ORDERS WERE NOT RECEIVED BY THEM AND THA T THEY CAME TO KNOW ABOUT THE PROCEEDINGS ONLY WHEN THEY APPEAR ED BEFORE THE DY. CIT FOR THE A.Y 2013-14 AND WERE INFORMED T HAT THERE ARE SOME ARREARS FOR THE A.YS 2011-12 AND 2012-13 AND T HAT IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER, THEY APPLIED FOR CERTIFIED COPIES AND AFTER RECEIVING THE CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE ORDERS THEY H AVE FILED THE APPEALS WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAY. THE CIT (A) HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ORDERS WERE DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AS IS E VIDENT FROM THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT SLIPS AND THAT THERE WAS NO APPLICA TION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR CERTIFIED COPIES NOR WAS THERE ANY ACK NOWLEDGEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE TO INDICATE THAT THE CERTIFIED COPI ES WERE GIVEN BY HIS OFFICE. THEREFORE, THE CIT (A) REFUSED TO CONDO NE THE DELAY AND DISMISSED THE APPEALS AND THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US BY RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL WHICH ARE C OMMON IN ALL THE THREE APPEALS: 1. THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE REASONS FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. 2. THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPEAL WAS NOT FILED ELECTRONICALLY. 3. THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT DECIDING THE ISSUE ON MERITS. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WHIL E THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, PRODUCED THE RECORDS TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) FOR THE A.Y 2011-12 HAS BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL MR. RAMANA WHEREAS THE AS SESSMENT ORDER FOR THE A.Y 2012-13 HAS BEEN SENT BY SPEED PO ST IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE ITSELF. COPIES OF THE ACKNOWLE DGEMENT SLIPS HAVE ALSO BEEN FILED BEFORE US. IN REBUTTAL, THE LE ARNED COUNSEL FOR ITA NOS 2025 TO 2027 OF 2017 BRICKS N STONES BUILDERS HYDERABAD. PAGE 3 OF 4 THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT HE HAS INSTRUCTIONS FROM HIS CLIENTS THAT THEY HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS U/S 14 3(1) BUT HAVE ONLY RECEIVED THE NOTICES FOR THE ASSESSMENTS U/S ON THE 153C OF THE ACT, IN RESPONSE TO WHICH, THE ASSESSEE HAS APP EARED AND PARTICIPATED IN THE PROCEEDINGS. HE FURTHER SUBMITT ED THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS ARE WITH REGARD TO THE ESTIMATION OF INCOME ONLY AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WOULD SU FFER IRREPARABLE LOSS, IF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT GIVEN AN O PPORTUNITY TO PRESENT ITS CASE. HE THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE DEL AY MAY BE CONDONED AND THE ISSUE MAY BE REMANDED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) FOR HIS DECISION ON MERITS. 4. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 14 3(3) FOR THE A.Y 2011-12 HAS BEEN SERVED ON THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, WHILE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE A.Y 2012-13 HAS BEEN SENT BY SPEED POST TO THE ASSESSEES ADDRESS. WHILE THE CON TENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT HAS NOT BEEN SERVED WITH THE ASSES SMENT ORDER FOR THE A.Y 2011-12 CAN BE ACCEPTED TO A CERTAIN EXTENT , BECAUSE THE COUNSEL MAY NOT HAVE INTIMATED THE SAME TO THE ASSE SSEE. FOR THE A.Y 2012-13, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS BEEN SENT BY SPEED POST AND THEREFORE, IT IS PRESUMED TO HAVE BEEN SERVED O N THE ASSESSEE, BUT AS SEEN FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS FILED BEFORE US IN THE APPEAL PAPERS, WE FIND THAT THEY ARE THE CERTIFIED COPIES ISSUED BY THE AO. THEREFORE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS PRESUMED TO HAVE RECEIVED THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS. BE THAT AS IT MAY, WHEN THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN COMPLETED BY ES TIMATING THE INCOME, THE ASSESSEE WOULD NOT HAVE BENEFITED IN AN Y WAY, BY NOT FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A). HENCE THE HON 'BLE SUPREME ITA NOS 2025 TO 2027 OF 2017 BRICKS N STONES BUILDERS HYDERABAD. PAGE 4 OF 4 COURT IN THE CASE OF COLLECTOR VS. MST KHATIJI & OT HERS REPORTED IN 167 ITR 471 (S.C) HAS CLEARLY HELD THAT WHERE THERE IS A PRIMA FACIE CASE IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AND THE PETI TIONER IS NOT LIKELY TO BENEFIT FROM THE DELAY, THE DELAY SHOULD BE COND ONED. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME, WE ARE INCLINED TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEALS BEFORE THE CIT (A) A ND REMAND THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) FOR DECISION ON ME RITS IN ALL THE THREE APPEALS. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH MAY, 2018. SD/- SD/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 25 TH MAY 2018. VINODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1 C/O CH. PARTHASARATHY & CO. 1-1-298/2/B/3, 1 ST FLOOR, SOWBHAGYA AVENUE, ST. NO.1, ASHOKNAGAR, HYDERABAD 5 00020 2 ITO WARD 4(3) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABA D 3 CIT (A) - 12, HYDERABAD 4 PR. CIT 1 HYDERABAD 5 THE DR, ITAT HYDERABAD 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER