Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2009] 114 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8949 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
2 month(s) 16 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
25-09-2009
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
A
Next Hearing Date
-
Assessment Year
1994-1995
Appeal Filed On
09-07-2009
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH A BEFORE SHRI T.K.SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.C.AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE OF HEARING : 09/09/09 DRAFTED ON: 23/09/09 ITA NO.2177/AHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1994-95 (DECED) BRIJ RATANLALJI MAGANLALJI GOSWAMI (BY EXECUTOR)VALLABHRAIJI GOVINDRAIJI MAHARAJ 10/137, MOTA MANDIR CHAUTA BRIDGE,SURAT 395 003 VS. THE ITO WARD-2(2) SURAT PAN/GIR NO. : - (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI J.P.SHAH, ADV. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI RAJEEV AGARWAL, DR O R D E R PER D.C.AGRAWAL , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :- THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS)-VI, SURAT DATED 04/09/2002 P ASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1994-95, BY RAISING FOLLOWING GROUN DS: THE APPELLANT WAS PURSUING HIS REMEDY AFTER FILING APPEAL TO THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) BY FILING A SETTLEMENT APPLICA TION TO THE ADD.BENCH OF SETTLEMENT COMMISSION MUMBAI WHERE HIS APPLICATION WAS DULY ADMITTED U/S.245-D(1) VIDE ORD ER NO DTD. ITA NO.2177/AHD /2009 (DECED) BRIJ RATANLALJI MAGANLALJI GOSWAMI VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 1994-95 - 2 - AS THE SETTLEMENT APPLICATION WAS ADMITTED BY THE C OMMISSION, THE LEARNED CIT HAD DISMISSED THE APPEAL (APPEAL NO.CAS -VI/326/00- 01) AS BEING INFRUCTUOUS AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION V IDE ORDER DATED 4/9/02 WITHOUT DECIDING ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL SUBMI TTED WITH THE APPEAL MEMO. AFTER THE ABATEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS BY THE SETTLEMEN T COMMISSION, THE PROCEEDINGS ARE NOW REVIVED AGAIN WITH THE SAME STATEMENT OF FACT AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN BEFORE THE CIT(APP EAL) WHICH ARE SUBMITTED HEREWITH FOR THE KIND CONSIDERATION B Y THE HON.BENCH MEMBERS OF I.T.A.T. 2. THE APPEAL IS LATE BY 2425 DAYS. AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 04/09/2009 HAS BEEN FILED BY SHRI VALLABHRAIJI GOVINDRAIJI MAH ARAJ, LEGAL HEIR OF DECEASED BRIJ RATANLALJI MAGANLALJI MAHARAJ STATING THE REASONS FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. IN THE AFFIDAVIT, IT IS EXP LAINED THAT AFTER ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1994-95 PASSED ON 31/01/2 001, THE ASSESSEE NOT ONLY PURSUED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A PPEALS) BUT ALSO FILED APPLICATION BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION ON 22/02/2002. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE AS SESSEE TREATING IT AS INFRUCTUOUS BECAUSE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION HAD ADMITTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE U/S.245D(1) OF THE I.T . ACT, 1961. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ITA NO.2177/AHD /2009 (DECED) BRIJ RATANLALJI MAGANLALJI GOSWAMI VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 1994-95 - 3 - CIT(APPEALS) AS, WITHIN THE STATUTORY PERIOD ITS A PPLICATION FOR FINAL DISPOSAL WAS PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION. THE PERIOD DURING WHICH ITS APPLICATION REMAINED PENDIN G WAS FROM 22/02/2002 TO 31/03/2008, WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ON 19/09/2002. 3. HOWEVER, BY VIRTUE OF AMENDMENT BROUGHT IN FIN ANCE ACT, 2007, THE APPLICATION FOR THE SETTLEMENT GOT ABATED ON 31/03/ 2008 AND NO ORDER U/S.245D(4) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 WAS PASSED BY TH E SETTLEMENT COMMISSION ON OR BEFORE 31/03/2008. THEREFORE, AS PER SECTION 245HA(2) OF THE ACT, PROCEEDINGS PENDING AT THE TIM E OF MAKING SETTLEMENT APPLICATION ARE REQUIRED TO BE DISPOSED OF BY THE RESPECTIVE INCOME-TAX AUTHORITY BEFORE WHOM THE PROCEEDINGS WE RE PENDING AT THE TIME OF MAKING APPLICATION U/S.245C(1) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPEAL BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) PASSED ON 04/09/2002. THE DELAY SO CAUSED IN FILING THE APPEAL SHOULD BE TREATED AS R EASONABLE. 4. AFTER HEARING THE PARTIES, WE CONDONE THE DELA Y AND ADMIT THE APPEAL. ITA NO.2177/AHD /2009 (DECED) BRIJ RATANLALJI MAGANLALJI GOSWAMI VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 1994-95 - 4 - 5. FROM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS), WE N OTICE THAT THE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED WITHOUT DISCUSSING ANY ISSUE ON MERIT. ACCORDINGLY, WE RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF L EARNED CIT(APPEALS) TO ADJUDICATE VARIOUS GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS T REATED AS ALLOWED BUT FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER SIGNED, DATED AND PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 25/09/2009. SD/- SD/- ( T.K.SHARMA ) ( D.C.AGRAWAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 25/ 09 /2009 T.C. NAIR COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS)-VI, SURAT 5. THE DR, AHMEDABAD BENCH 6. THE GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR), ITAT, AHMEDABAD
Mehul