1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH (SMC), JODHPUR (BEFORE SHRI .N.L. KALRA , ACCCOUNTANT MEMBE R) ITA NOS.213 & 214/JU/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 PAN: AIYPC 72779 C SHRI GOURAV BANSAL VS. THE ITO PROP M/S. HINDUSTAN NATURAL SAND STONES WARD- 1 INDL AREA, BIDIYAD MAKRANA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI N.R. MEDHTIYA DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI MAHESH KUMAR DATE OF HEARING: 30-11-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30.11.2011. ORDER PER N.L. KALRA, AM:- THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEALS AGAINST RESPECT IVE ORDERS OF THE LD.CIT(A), JODHPUR DATED 27-01-2010 AND 18-01-2010 FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2.1 THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN REJECTING THE APPEALS ON THE GROUND OF LATE FILING OF APPEALS WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPERTY OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN THE REASONS. 2.2 THE REGISTRY ISSUED DEFECT NOTICES. BEFORE ME, THE LD. AR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IN ITS APPEALS IS CONTESTING THE ISSUE ON THE GROUND OF LIMITATION. SUCH APPEALS WILL FALL WITHIN SECTION 253(6)(D) OF THE ACT. IT WAS THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE FEE OF RS. 500/- IS TO BE PAID. FOR THIS PROPOSITION, THE LD. AR HAS RELIED ON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE KARNATAKA HI GH COURT IN THE CASE OF RAJAKAMAL POLYMERS (P) LTD. VS CIT, 291 ITR 314. TH E LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED 2 THAT HON'BLE PATNA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF DR. A JITH KUMAR PANDEY VS VS ITAT , 310 ITR 195 HAS HELD THAT FEE OF RS. 500/ - IS PAYABLE IN THE CASE OF PENALTY IN VIEW OF SECTION 253(6)(D) OF THE ACT. TH US AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE , THE APP EALS ARE ADMITTED. 2.3 THE LD.CIT(A) HAS REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF T HE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF CONDONATION OF DELAY. IN THE APPLICATION, IT WAS SU BMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DUE TO ILLNESS OF HIS GRAND MOTHER WAS LIVING AT AGRA AND THEREFORE, HE WAS NOT ABLE TO COME TO MAKRANA FOR SIGNATURE ON MEMO OF APPEAL. TH E LD.CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT NO EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION WAS FIL ED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS LIVING AT AGRA TO LOOK AFTER HIS GRAND MOTHER. THERE HAS BEEN NO SUFFICIENT CAUSE WITH THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEALS WITHIN TIME. 2.4 I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. BEFORE ME, THE L D. AR HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE AFFIDAVIT, IT IS MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS LIVING IN AGRA WITH HIS GRAND PARENTS BUT AFTER THE DEATH OF HIS GRAND FATHER, HE WAS TO LOOK AFTER HIS GRAND MOTHER AND HAS TO RESIDE IN AGRA. A S AND WHEN HIS GRAND MOTHER IS PERFECTLY WELL THEN HE GOES TO MAKRANA. DURING THE LAST TWO YEARS, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO GO TO MAKRANA. THE MEDICAL CERTIFIC ATE WAS ALSO FILED IN WHICH IT IS MENTIONED THAT THE GRAND MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE WA S NOT WELL DURING THE PERIOD 5- 102009 TO 5-12-2009. I THEREFORE, FEEL THAT THERE W AS SUFFICIENT REASON WITH THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEALS WITHIN TIME. TH E DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) IS CONDONED AND LD.CIT(A) SHOU LD DECIDE THE APPEALS ON 3 MERIT. HENCE, THE APPEALS IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS PENALTY U/S 271B ARE RESTORED BACK ON THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT(A) 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 -11-2011 SD/- (N.L. KALRA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JODHPUR DATED: 30 /11/2011 MISHRA COPY TO: 1. M/S. SHRI RAM GUM & CHEMICALS, JODHPUR 2. THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 1, JODHPUR 3.THE LD. CIT (A) BY ORDER 4.THE CIT 5.THE D/R 6.THE GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 499/JU/09) A.R.. ITAT: JODHPUR