Shahul Hameed, Chennai V. ACIT, Non Corp Cir-2, , Chennai

ITA 215/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9833 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.214 & 215 to 217/Chny/2019 िनधा रण वष /Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2011-12 to 2013-14 Mr.Shahul Hameed, No.17/8-A, Gopathy Narayana Chetty Street, Mylapore, Chennai. v. The Asst. Commissioner- of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Circle-2, Chennai. [PAN: DYZPS 2897 P] (अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) अपीलाथ क ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.T.Vasudevan, Adv. यथ क ओर से /Respondent by : Mr.Guru Bashyam, CIT-DR सुनवाई क तारीख/Date of Hearing : 19.09.2022 घोषणा क तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 28.09.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: These four appeals filed by the assessee are directed against separate, but identical orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chennai, dated 29.01.2018, 30.01.2018 & 31.01.2018 and pertains to assessment years 2008-09 & 2011-12 to 2013-14 respectively. Since, facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2. At the outset, we find that the appeals filed by the assessee for all four assessment years is time barred by 247 days, for which, petition for आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ यायपीठ, चे ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा , एवं ी जी. मंजूनाथा, , माननीय लेखा सद के सम BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.214-217/Chny/2019 Mr.Shahul Hameed :: 2 :: condonation of delay along with Affidavit has been filed explaining the reasons for delay in filing of these appeals. The Ld.AR for the assessee referring to petition filed by the assessee submitted that appeal orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) on 29.01.2018, 30.01.2018 & 31.01.2018 has been received by the assessee on 28.03.2018. The assessee had handed over original orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) and copies of assessment orders and other relevant papers to the Accountant, to be handed over to the Advocate in order to prepare appeal papers against the orders of Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.AR further submitted that in the meantime, the assessee met with an accident and got injured severely and fractured his hands. Further, he was under treatment and was advised total bed rest. After the accident, the assessee was on continuous treatment for various ailments and was advised not to travel and to be on bed rest. Under these extreme health conditions, the assessee could not totally concentrate on his business or other tax compliances such as filing the returns and also preferring the appeals. Further, the assessee under a bona fide belief that the Accountant would take care of these aspects and follow up with the Advocate for filing of the appeals. However, the Accountant abruptly quit his job without handing over the documents relating to Income Tax matters to the assessee. Therefore, he submitted that the delay in filing of the appeals is beyond the control of the assessee. Further, the assessee neither derived any benefit nor got undue advantage by not filing the appeals, but rather he was put himself under great trouble ITA Nos.214-217/Chny/2019 Mr.Shahul Hameed :: 3 :: by not preferring the appeals and thus, submitted that the delay in filing of these appeals may be condoned in the interest of natural justice. 3. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, strongly opposing the petition filed by the assessee for condonation of delay, submitted that the reasons given by the assessee for not filing these appeals within the time limit allowed under the Act, does not come under the ambit of reasonable and bona fide reasons which can be considered for condonation of delay. Although, the assessee has filed Medical Certificate from the hospital, but if you go through medical documents filed by the assessee, said documents pertains to 03.10.2018, which is much before the date on which the Ld.CIT(A) passed his order on 29.01.2018, 30.01.2018 & 31.01.2018. Therefore, there is no merit in the petition filed by the assessee and thus, appeals filed by the assessee should not be admitted for hearing. 4. We have heard both the parties and considered the petition filed by the assessee for condonation of delay of 247 days. We have also carefully considered reasons given by the assessee for delay in filing of the appeals. We find that prima facie the reasons given by the assessee, in the Affidavit for condonation of delay of 247 days, seems to be not bona fide. We have gone through the affidavit filed by the assessee and also examined sequence of events and after considering necessary facts, we are of the considered view that the reasons given by the assessee in Affidavit is not bona fide. Therefore, we are of the considered view that there is no merit ITA Nos.214-217/Chny/2019 Mr.Shahul Hameed :: 4 :: in the reasons given by the assessee in the petition for condonation of delay in filing of the appeals. 5. Be that as it may. Coming back to the legal position evolved by the decision of various High Courts, including the Hon’ble Supreme Court in number of cases, where it has been, time and again, held that when merits and technicalities pitted against each other, then merit alone deserves to be prevailed, because, if you throw meritorious case out of judicial scrutiny on the grounds of technicalities, then, you may deprive the right of the assessee in pursuing his case. At the same time, various Courts have held that rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of parties, but they are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics, but seek their remedy promptly, within the time bound prescribed under the Act. Further, in a case, where, for the reasons beyond the control of the assessee, the appeals could not be filed, then, the Courts are well equipped with power to condone the delay, if the assessee explains the delay in filing of the appeals with a reasonable cause. However, there is no law or mandate in the Act, to condone the delay in each and every case. But, it depends upon facts of each case and the reasons given by the parties for condonation of delay. Therefore, one has to go by the facts of its own case and the reasons given by the assessee for condonation of delay. In this case, on perusal of reasons given by the assessee for delay in filing of the appeals, we find that although it appears, the assessee is not deriving any benefit by not filing the appeals within the due date prescribed under the ITA Nos.214-217/Chny/2019 Mr.Shahul Hameed :: 5 :: Act, but, from contents of petition filed by the assessee, we could easily make out a case that the assessee has made an afterthought to file the appeals against the order of the Ld.CIT(A). Therefore, in our considered view, for these vague reasons, such huge delay of 247 days in filing of the appeals, cannot be condoned. 6. In this view of the matter and considering the facts and circumstances of the cases, we are of the considered view that the assessee has failed to make out a prima facie case for condonation of delay of 247 days in filing of the appeals before the Tribunal. Further, the reasons given by the assessee in the Affidavit does not come under reasonable cause as prescribed under the Act, for condonation of delay. Hence, we reject the petition filed by the assessee for condonation of delay and dismiss the appeals filed by the assessee. 7. In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as not maintainable. Order pronounced on the 28 th day of September, 2022, in Chennai. Sd/- (महावीर िसंह) (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा /VICE PRESIDENT Sd/- (जी. मंजूनाथा) (G. MANJUNATHA) लेखा सद य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे ई/Chennai, दनांक/Dated: 28 th September, 2022. TLN ITA Nos.214-217/Chny/2019 Mr.Shahul Hameed :: 6 :: आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 4. आयकर आयु /CIT 2. यथ /Respondent 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 3. आयकर आयु (अपील)/CIT(A) 6. गाड! फाईल/GF