Country Condos Ltd.(Formerly Country Club Bangalore Ltd.,), Hyderabad, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward - 1(2), Hyderabad, Hyderabad

ITA 248/HYD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 91740 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 03-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 12-03-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMAKRISHNA BANDI
• Assessee Lawyers: P MURALI MOHAN RAO
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD BEFORE AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 248/HYD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 M/S COUNTRY CONDOZ LTD., (FORMERLY M/S COUNTRY CLUB BANGALORE LTD.), HYDERABAD. PAN AABCC4795L VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P. MURALI MOHAN RAO REVENUE BY : SHRI RAMAKRISHNA BANDI DATE OF HEARING 03-06-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19-06-2015 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER DATED 13/10/2014 OF LD. CIT(A)-II, HYDERABAD FOR THE AY 2 009-10. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS ARE, ASSESSEE A COMPANY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 30/09/2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 8,13,289. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, AO NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE HAS CREDITED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 28,44,000 AS LEASE RENT RECEIVED F ROM PROPERTY SITUATED AT HYDERABAD AND BANGALORE. AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE LEASE RENT OF RS. 28,44,000 RECEIVED FROM BANGALORE PROPERTY SHOULD BE TREATED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. ACCORDINGL Y, HE ISSUED A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO ASSESSEE. THOUGH, ASSESSEE IN REPLY SUBMITTED BEFORE AO STATED THAT IF INCOME FROM BANGALORE PROP ERTY IS TREATED AS 2 ITA NO. 248 /HYD/2015 COUNTRY CONDOZ LTD. INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES, THEN, EXPENDITURE INCURR ED SHOULD ALSO BE ALLOWED AGAINST SUCH INCOME, BUT, ULTIMATELY, AO CO MPLETED THE ASSESSMENT BY DETERMINING THE INCOME OF ASSESSEE AT RS. 16,66,489. BEING AGGRIEVED OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, SO PASSED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A). AS IT APPEARS F ROM THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), SHE MADE AN ENQUIRY WITH AO WITH REGARD TO THE DATE OF SERVICE OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ON ASSESSEE. ON OBTAINI NG INFORMATION FROM AO THAT ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS SERVED ON ASSESSE E ON 13/12/2011 WHEREAS APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BY ASSESSEE ON 13/01/12, AFTER EXPIRY OF THE PRESCRIBED TIME LIMIT. LD. CIT( A) DISMISSED ASSESSEES APPEAL EX-PARTE ON THE GROUND OF DELAY. BEING AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US . 3. THOUGH ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS NINE GROUN DS CHALLENGING THE LEGALITY OF DISMISSAL OF APPEAL IN LIMINE AS WELL AS ON MERITS OF THE ADDITION MADE BY AO, BUT, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. AR SUBMITTED BEFORE US, LD. CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE CONDONE D THE DELAY OF 19 DAYS IN FILING OF APPEAL AND DECIDEC THE ISSUE ON M ERIT. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED, DISPOSAL OF APPEAL WITHOUT ALLOWING AN O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO ASSESSEE IS IN VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. HE, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED, THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BA CK TO LD. CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE ON MERIT AFTER CONDONING THE DEL AY. 4. LD. DR HAS NO SERIOUS OBJECTION, IF, THE MATTER IS REMITTED BACK TO LD. CIT(A) FOR GRANTING ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE CAUSE OF DELAY. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIE S AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. UNDISPUTEDLY, THERE IS A D ELAY OF 19 DAYS IN FILING APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A), WHICH HAS RENDERED THE APPEAL DEFECTIVE. HOWEVER, AS IT APPEARS FROM THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), NO OPPORTUNITY WAS GRANTED TO ASSESSEE TO REMOVE THE D EFECT BY EXPLAINING THE DELAY BEFORE DISMISSING ASSESSEES A PPEAL IN LIMINE. BEFORE US, LD. AR HAS SUBMITTED AN AFFIDAVIT OF SHR I Y. SIDDHARTH 3 ITA NO. 248 /HYD/2015 COUNTRY CONDOZ LTD. REDDY, DIRECTOR OF ASSESSEE COMPANY EXPLAINING THE CAUSE OF DELAY. ADMITTEDLY, ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED EITHER ANY DELAY CONDONATION PETITION OR AFFIDAVIT BEFORE LD. CIT(A) EXPLAINING THE CAUSE OF DELAY. SINCE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL IS BEFORE LD. CIT(A ), SHE IS THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY TO EXAMINE WHETHER THERE IS S UFFICIENT CAUSE TO CONDONE THE DELAY. IN THE AFORESAID VIEW OF THE MAT TER, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND REMIT THE MATT ER BACK TO HER FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE OF DELAY AFTER PERUSING THE AFFI DAVIT ALONG WITH DELAY CONDONATION PETITION FILED BY ASSESSEE SEEKIN G CONDONATION OF DELAY. SINCE THE DELAY IS OF ONLY 19 DAYS, WE HOPE LD. CIT(A) WOULD CONSIDER THE ISSUE JUDICIOUSLY AND SYMPATHETICALLY WITHOUT BEING TOO TECHNICAL AND MAKE AN ENDEAVOUR TO DECIDE THE APPEA L ON MERIT. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH JUNE, 2015. SD/- SD/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 19 TH JUNE, 2015 KV COPY TO:- 1) M/S COUNTRY CONDOZ LTD., C/O P. MURALI & CO., C AS., 6-3-655/2/3, 1 ST FLOOR, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD 500 082 2) ITO, WARD - 1(2), HYDERABAD 3 CIT(A)-II, HYDERABAD 4) CIT-I, HYDERABAD 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDE RABAD.