Abdul Raouf Mohd, Hyderabad V. ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

ITA 242/Hyd/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5923 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 16-06-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y V S T SAI
• Assessee Lawyers: K A SAI PRASAD
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 153A; 13; 144; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT A NO S . 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242 & 243 /H/20 2 1 AY S . : 2012 - 13, 2013 - 14, 2 0 1 4 - 1 5 , 2015 - 16, 2016 - 17, 2017 - 18 & 2018 - 19 ABDUL RAOUF MOHD., HYDERABAD. PAN A ZZPM 7609M VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI K.A. SAI PRASAD REVENUE BY: S HRI YVST SAI DATE OF HEARING: 14 /0 9 /2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 15 /0 9 /2021 O R D E R PER L.P. SAHU, A.M. : ALL THESE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST CIT(A) - 12 , HYDERABAD S SEPARATE ORDER S, ALL DATED , 2 5 / 0 2 / 20 21 FOR AY S 2012 - 13 TO 2018 - 19 INVOLVING PROCEEDINGS U/S 14 4 R.W.S 153A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ; IN SHORT THE ACT. I TA NO S . 237 TO 243 /HYD /20 2 1 ABDUL RAOUF MOHD., HYD. : - 2 - : 2 . WE NOTICE AT THE OUTSET THAT ASSESSEE S INSTANT APPEAL S SUFFER FROM 1 DAY DELAY IN FILING EACH APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. CASE LAW COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION VS MST. KATIJI & ORS, 1987 AIR 1353 (SC) AND UNIVERSITY OF DELHI VS. UNION OF INDIA, CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9488 & 9489/2019 DATED 17 DECEMBER, 2019, HOLD THAT SUCH A DELAY; SUPPORTED BY COGENT REASONS, D ESERVES TO BE CONDONED SO AS TO MAKE WAY FOR THE CAUSE OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE. WE ACCORDINGLY HOLD THAT ASSESSEES IMPUGNED DELAY IS NEITHER INTENTIONAL NOR DELIBERATE BUT DUE TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND ITS CONTROL. THE SAME STANDS CONDONED. CASE S ARE NOW TAKEN UP FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. 3. A COMMON GRIEVANCE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ALL THE APPEALS IS THAT THE CIT(A) IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN N OT CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL, AND NOT ADJUDICATING THE GROUNDS ON MERITS. 3. REFERRING TO THE ABOVE GROUND, I N THE COURSE OF HEARING, IT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD DISMISSED THE APPEALS I TA NO S . 237 TO 243 /HYD /20 2 1 ABDUL RAOUF MOHD., HYD. : - 3 - : IN LIMINE WITHOUT CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE HIM. THEREFORE, IT WOULD BE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER S MAY BE RESTORED TO HIS FILE FOR DECIDING VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEAL S ON MERITS. THE LD. AR UNDERT OOK TO PRODUCE ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE S BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE LEARNED DR AGREED WITH THE AFORESAID STATEMENT OF THE LEARNED AR. 3 . WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE REQUEST MADE BY THE LEARNED AR. WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN - LIMINE ON THE TECHNICAL GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THESE APPEALS WITH A DELAY BEFORE HIM BY HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT S REASON FOR DELAY THAT HE HAD TO TRAVEL TO DELHI & GUJARAT FOR THE CASE AND HENCE COULD NOT FILE APPEALS ON TIME IN HYDERABAD, DOES NOT CONSTITUTE REASONABLE OR SUFFICIENT CAUSE BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION, SINCE IT DOES NOT GIVE ANY BONA - FIDE REASON TO E XPLAIN THE DELAY. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT INTEREST OF JUSTICE WILL B E SERVED IF THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR DECIDING VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON I TA NO S . 237 TO 243 /HYD /20 2 1 ABDUL RAOUF MOHD., HYD. : - 4 - : MERITS BY CONDONING THE IMPUGNED DELAYS IN FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE HIM. ACCORDINGLY, THE CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND AFFORD REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE APPEAL S ON MERITS. WE DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE CIT(A) WITH ALL THE RELEVANT EVIDENCES; WITHIN TH REE EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITIES OF HEARING. 4 . IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN ABOVE TERMS. A COPY OF THIS COMMON ORDER BE PLACED IN THE RESPECTIVE CASE FILES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH SEPTEMBER , 2021 . SD/ - SD/ - ( S.S. GODARA ) (L . P . SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDE RABAD, DATED : 15 TH SEPTEMBER , 20 2 1 . K V I TA NO S . 237 TO 243 /HYD /20 2 1 ABDUL RAOUF MOHD., HYD. : - 5 - : C OPY TO : 1 ABDUL RAOUF MOHD., C/O CH. PARTHASARATHY & CO., 1 - 1 - 298/2/B/3, 1 ST FLOOR, SOWBHAGYA AVENUE, ST. NO. 1, ASHOKNAGAR, HYDERABAD 500 020. 2 AC IT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), AYAKAR BHAVAN, HYDERABAD. 3 C I T(A) - 12 , HYDERABAD 4 PR. CIT (CENTRAL) , HYDERABAD 5 ITAT, DR, HYDERABAD. 6 GUARD FILE.