Shri Subhash N.Brahmbhatt, Kalol V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-3, Mehsana

ITA 2088/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 137 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0039 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 19-01-2010
• Assessment Year: 1989-1990
• Appeal Filed On: 01-07-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOVIND SINGHAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DIVATIA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH 'SMC' (BEFORE SHRI N S SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO.2088/AHD/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:- 1989-90) SHRI SUBHASH N BRAHMBHATT PROP. OF MARRY PRODUCT, 8, VARDHMAN NAGAR, BEHIND JAIN WADI, KALOL V/S THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, MEHSANA [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] APPELLANT BY :- SHRI S N DIVATIA, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI GOVIND SINGHAL, SR. DR O R D E R THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) DA TED 03-02- 2005 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1989-90, WHEREIN THE GROUN DS OF APPEAL TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S.271(1)(C ) OF THE ACT1)(C) BY THE A.O. 2. THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT NOT TO HAVE CONFIRMED THE PENALTY LEVI ED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) BY THE A.O. 3. THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR FILING THIS APPEAL LATE AND UNDER THE CIRCUMSTA NCES THE DELAY SHOULD BE CONDONED. 2. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE WAS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 1500 DAYS AS POINTED OUT BY THE RE GISTRY. THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE S UBMITTED THAT AN AFFIDAVIT HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF HIS REASONS FOR 2 FILING THE APPEAL WITH THE ABOVE DELAY. THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT ASSES SEE WAS NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE PASSING OF THE ORDER BY THE LEA RNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) AND WHEN RECOVE RY PROCEEDING WERE INITIATED AGAINST HIM THEN HE CAME TO KNOW ABOUT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND THEREAFTER, THE PRESENT APPEAL WAS FILED ON 01.07.2 009. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE APPELLANT ASSESSEE IS IN FINANCI AL DIFFICULT SITUATION AND THE APPEAL FEE OF RS.500/- WAS ALSO P AID AFTER BORROWING THE SAME FROM A FRIEND. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPR ESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED THE ABOVE CONDONATION OF DELAY A ND CONTENDED THAT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AFTER CONSIDERABLE DELAY WITHOUT EXPLAINING THE SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THIS DELAY AND THEREFORE, THE APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE ADMITTED FOR HEARING. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM FORM NO.36, MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, IT IS OBSERVED THAT IN CLAUSE NO.9 DATE OF COMMUNICATION OF ORDER DATED 3.02.2009 PASSED BY TH E LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) IS STATED AS 24 .03.2005. THUS, IT IS OBSERVED THAT IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APP EALS) WAS NOT SERVED UPON HIM ON 24.03.2005. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACT, THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE ABOUT PASSING OF THE ORDER BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS CONTRARY TO THE FACT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN T HE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL AND HENCE INCORRECT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBMIT ANY GENUINE REASONABLE CAUSE FOR SUCH DELAY OF 1500 DAYS IN FILING OF THE APPEAL FOR WHICH ONLY DELAY CAN BE CONDONED. I THEREFORE, FIND THAT DELAY IN THE INSTANCE 3 CASE CANNOT BE CONDONED. THEREFORE, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. ORDER SIGNED, DATED PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 29 -01 -2010 SD/- (N S SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE : 29 - 01 - 20 10 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. SHRI SUBHASH N BRAHMBHATT, PROP. OF MARRY PRODUC T, 8, VARDHMAN NAGAR, BEHIND JAIN WADI, KALOL 2. THE ITO, WARD-3, MEHSANA 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT(A)-XXI, AHMEDABAD 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD