P. P. PATEL - LA VJAY J/V, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, (OSD), TDS, Ahmedabad

ITA 2227/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5845 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 26-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 04-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: IRA KAPOOR RAJESH MEENA

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 2 227 /AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 0 7 - 0 8 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD C BENCH, AHMEDBAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND S.S. GODARA JM ] ITA NO. 2 227 /AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 0 7 - 08 P. P . PATEL LA VJAYJ/V .. ..................APPELLANT 2/5 GOLD COIN CO MPLEX, STELLITE AHMEDABAD [PAN: A ABTP 1266 G ] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER (OSD) TDS .. .. .. . RESPONDENT AHMEDABAD . APPEARANCES BY: IRA KAPOOR F OR THE A PPELLANT RAJESH MEENA FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 2 6 .05 .2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 26 . 05. 2017 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR AM: 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CO RRECTNESS OF THE ORDER D ATED 26.05.2014 PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 200 7 - 08 . 2. A PERUSAL OF THE INSTANT APPEAL REVEALS THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS DECLINED ASSESSEE S APPEAL BY NOT CONDONING DELAY OF MORE THAN THIRTY DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. IT EMANATES FROM PARA 3 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PLEADED HIMSELF TO BE MORE THAN EIGHTY YEARS OLD, SUFFERING FROM ILL HEALTH. HE CITED THE VERY REASON FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO F I LE HIS A PPEAL BEFORE T HE LOWER APPELLATE AUTHORITY WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME DURATION. LEARNED C IT(A) OBSERV ED IN HIS OPERATIVE PORTI ON PARA 3.1 THAT THE SAID ASS E SSE E S PLEADINGS DID NO T FORM A VALID AND JUSTIFIABLE CAUSE TO ITA NO. 2 227 /AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 0 7 - 0 8 PAGE 2 OF 2 CONDONE THE ABOVE DELAY. WE FIND NO REASON TO CONCUR WITH THE HYPER T ECHNICAL APPR OA CH MORE SO WHEN THE LEARNED CIT(A) DID NOT EVEN ASK T HE ASSESS E E TO FURNISH THE PROOF OF HIS ILL HEALTH. BE THAT AS IT MAY, WE CONCLUDE THAT LARGER INTEREST AND JUSTICE WOULD BE SERVED IN CASE THE LOW E R AUTHOR ITY DECIDE S THE APPEAL ON MERITS RATHER THAN ON SUCH TECHNICAL G ROUND. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW , THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONDONED THE DELAY AND DECIDED THE MATTER ON MERITS. WE , THEREFORE , REMIT THE INSTANT APPEAL B A CK TO THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSES SE E. L EARNED CIT( A) IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL EXPEDITIOUSLY, AFTER HEARING TH E PARTIES. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON 26 TH M AY 2017. SD/ - SD/ - S.S. GODARA PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNT ANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD , DATED THE 26 TH DAY OF MAY , 201 7 COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD