Invesco Finance Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata V. I.T.O.,Ward-1(2), Kolkata

ITA 2504/KOL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0733 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-06-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 10-06-2020
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 26-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: IMOKABA JAMIR
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVI TULSIYAN F
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of being heard; Earning of tax free income; Condonation of delay; Rule 8D
• Section: 143(3); 14A; 250; 131; 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA D BENCH, KOLKATA [VIRTUAL COURT HEARING] (BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, HONBLE VICE PRESIDENT, KZ & SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA NO. 2504/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2012-13 INVESCO FINANCE PVT. LTD.....................................................................APPELLANT 35, C.R. AVENUE KOLKATA 700 012 [PAN : AAACV 8958 M] VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2) KOLKATA.............................RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: SHRI RAVI TULSIYAN, F.C.A., APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. SHRI IMOKABA JAMIR, CIT D/R, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : JUNE 10 TH , 2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : JUNE 10 TH , 2020 ORDER PER P.M. JAGTAP, VP, KZ:- THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 17, KOLKATA, (HEREINAFTER THE LD.CIT(A)), DT. 30/01/2019, PASSED EX-PARTE, WHEREBY HE DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS AN INVESTMENT COMPANY WHICH FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ON 20/09/2012 DECLARING A LOSS OF RS.51,41,925/-. IN THE SAID RETURN, DIVIDEND INCOME RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS CLAIMED TO BE EXEMPT BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, NO DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENSES INCURRED IN RELATION TO THE SAID EXEMPT INCOME WAS OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISION OF SECTION 14A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (ACT). THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, INVOKED RULE 8D OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 (RULES) AND WORKED OUT THE EXPENSES INCURRED IN RELATION TO THE EXEMPT INCOME AT RS.76,24,666/-. HE, HOWEVER, RESTRICTED THE DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A OF THE ACT TO THE EXTENT OF EXPENSES ACTUALLY INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS.51,97,829/-. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD RAISED SHARE CAPITAL OF RS.99,69,020/- WITH SHARE PREMIUM OF RS.48,84,81,980/-. IN ORDER OF VERIFY THE SAME, SUMMONS U/S 131 OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE SHARE SUBSCRIBER COMPANIES. THE SAME, HOWEVER, REMAINED UNCOMPLIED WITH. EVEN THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FAILED TO PRODUCE THE DIRECTORS OF THE SHARE SUBSCRIBER COMPANIES FOR EXAMINATION/VERIFICATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DESPITE SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITIES BEING AFFORDED IN THIS REGARD. THE SHARE CAPITAL AND SHARE PREMIUM AGGREGATING TO RS.49,84,51,000/ CASH CREDIT AND ADDITION TO THAT EXTENT WAS MADE BY HIM TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF ASSESSEE U/S 68 OF THE ACT. IN THE ASSESSMENT COMP ORDER DT. 26/03/2015. 3. AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(3), THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND SINCE THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE NOTICES ISSU FROM TIME TO TIME, THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE APPELLATE ORDER DT. 30/01/2019 68 AND THE DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A R.W.R. 8D BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AT THE OUTSET IT IS NO ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN THIS REGARD, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR THE SAID DELAY AS WELL AS FOR THE NON- COMPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AS UNDER: 3. THAT AN APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE THE LD. C.I.T.( DISALLOWANCES/ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE APPELLATE ORDER U/S. 250 OF THE ACT WAS PASSED ON SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCES/ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AN DISMISSING THE APPEAL. 4. THAT THE INCOME AFTER BY THE ACCOUNTANT OF THE COMPANY. THEREFORE, THE MANAGEMENT OF THE COMPANY WAS NOT AWARE ABOUT PASSING OF THE SAID APPELLATE ORDER. HE WAS IRR EGULAR IN HIS SERVICES AND ULTIMATELY LEFT THE JOB OF THE COMPANY WITHOUT TAKING ANY STEP OR EVEN INTIMATING THE SAME TO THE MANAGEMENT. THEREFORE, THE MANAGEMENT WAS NOT PRACTICALLY AWARE OF PASSING OF THE SAID APPELLATE ORDER AND THUS TO FURTHER TAKE APP 5. THAT A NEW ACCOUNTANT THEREAFTER TOOK CHARGE IN HIS PLACE, WHO WAS ALSO NOT AWARE OF THE SAID APPELLATE ORDER. IT WAS ONLY ON 11.09.2019 WHEN SUBMITTING E REPLY TO THE NOTICE OF THE LD. A.O. IN ACCOUNTANT FOUND THE APPELLATE ORDER 11.09.2019. THEREAFTER ON THOROUGH SEARCH, THE HARD COPY OF THE SAID ORDER WAS 2 FOR EXAMINATION/VERIFICATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DESPITE SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITIES BEING AFFORDED IN THIS REGARD. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, TREATED THE SHARE CAPITAL AND SHARE PREMIUM AGGREGATING TO RS.49,84,51,000/ - CASH CREDIT AND ADDITION TO THAT EXTENT WAS MADE BY HIM TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF U/S 68 OF THE ACT. IN THE ASSESSMENT COMP LETED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(3), THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND SINCE THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE NOTICES ISSU ED BY HIM FIXING THE SAID APPEAL FOR HEARING FROM TIME TO TIME, THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE 30/01/2019 , PASSED EX-PARTE, THEREBY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION U/S 68 AND THE DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A R.W.R. 8D , MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AT THE OUTSET IT IS NO TED THAT THERE IS A DELAY OF 200 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN THIS REGARD, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR THE SAID DELAY AS WELL AS FOR COMPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AS UNDER: - THAT AN APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE THE LD. C.I.T.( A)- 17, KOLKATA AGITATING THE DISALLOWANCES/ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE APPELLATE ORDER U/S. 250 OF THE ACT WAS PASSED ON 30.01.2019 IN APPEAL NO. 147CIT(A) SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCES/ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AN DISMISSING THE APPEAL. THAT THE INCOME - TAX MATTER OF THE COMPANY WAS BEING INDEPENDENTLY LOOKED AFTER BY THE ACCOUNTANT OF THE COMPANY. THEREFORE, THE MANAGEMENT OF THE COMPANY WAS NOT AWARE ABOUT PASSING OF THE SAID APPELLATE ORDER. HE WAS EGULAR IN HIS SERVICES AND ULTIMATELY LEFT THE JOB OF THE COMPANY WITHOUT TAKING ANY STEP OR EVEN INTIMATING THE SAME TO THE MANAGEMENT. THEREFORE, THE MANAGEMENT WAS NOT PRACTICALLY AWARE OF PASSING OF THE SAID APPELLATE ORDER AND THUS TO FURTHER TAKE APP ROPRIATE STEP IN THIS MATTER. THAT A NEW ACCOUNTANT THEREAFTER TOOK CHARGE IN HIS PLACE, WHO WAS ALSO NOT AWARE OF THE SAID APPELLATE ORDER. IT WAS ONLY ON 11.09.2019 WHEN SUBMITTING E REPLY TO THE NOTICE OF THE LD. A.O. IN RELATION TO A.Y. 2017 ACCOUNTANT FOUND THE APPELLATE ORDER AND DOWNLOADED IT FROM THE WEBSITE ON 11.09.2019. THEREAFTER ON THOROUGH SEARCH, THE HARD COPY OF THE SAID ORDER WAS ITA NO. 2504/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2012-13 INVESCO FINANCE PVT. LTD. FOR EXAMINATION/VERIFICATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DESPITE SPECIFIC THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, TREATED - AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AND ADDITION TO THAT EXTENT WAS MADE BY HIM TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF LETED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(3), THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND SINCE THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE ON THE ED BY HIM FIXING THE SAID APPEAL FOR HEARING FROM TIME TO TIME, THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE HIS THEREBY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION U/S BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT TED THAT THERE IS A DELAY OF 200 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IN THIS REGARD, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR THE SAID DELAY AS WELL AS FOR ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) DURING THE COURSE 17, KOLKATA AGITATING THE DISALLOWANCES/ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE APPELLATE ORDER U/S. 147CIT(A) -17/KOL/17-18, SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCES/ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AN D THUS TAX MATTER OF THE COMPANY WAS BEING INDEPENDENTLY LOOKED AFTER BY THE ACCOUNTANT OF THE COMPANY. THEREFORE, THE MANAGEMENT OF THE COMPANY WAS NOT AWARE ABOUT PASSING OF THE SAID APPELLATE ORDER. HE WAS EGULAR IN HIS SERVICES AND ULTIMATELY LEFT THE JOB OF THE COMPANY WITHOUT TAKING ANY STEP OR EVEN INTIMATING THE SAME TO THE MANAGEMENT. THEREFORE, THE MANAGEMENT WAS NOT PRACTICALLY AWARE OF PASSING OF THE SAID APPELLATE ORDER THAT A NEW ACCOUNTANT THEREAFTER TOOK CHARGE IN HIS PLACE, WHO WAS ALSO NOT AWARE OF THE SAID APPELLATE ORDER. IT WAS ONLY ON 11.09.2019 WHEN SUBMITTING E - RELATION TO A.Y. 2017 -18, THE PRESENT IT FROM THE WEBSITE ON 11.09.2019. THEREAFTER ON THOROUGH SEARCH, THE HARD COPY OF THE SAID ORDER WAS ULTIMATELY TRACED IN THE MIXED BUNDLE OF PAPERS. IT WAS, THEREFORE NOT KNOWN WHEN THE SAID ORDER WAS ACTUALLY SERVED ON THE PETITIONER 6. THAT ON THE ABOVE FACTS, THEREFORE, A PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IS BEING FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL CONSIDERING THE DATE 11.03.2019, ON WHICH DATE THE SAID ORDER WAS UPLOADED TO THE WE HON BLE TRIBUNAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED WITHIN 10.05.2019. HOWEVER, THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ON 26.11.2019, RESULTING IN A DELAY OF 198 DAYS BEYOND THE PRESCRIBED DUE DATE. 7. THAT THE NEW ACCOUNTANT CAME TO KNOW ONLY ON 11.09.2019 ABOUT THE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 30.01.2019 WHEN HE WAS E 2017- 18. HE WAS ALSO BUSY WITH TAX AUDIT REPORT OF THE COMPANY FOR F.Y.2018 19 AND OTHER COMP 8. THAT THEREAFTER ON APPROVAL FROM THE MANAGEMENT, THE ACCOUNTANT CONSULTED THE LAWYER ABOUT THE FUTURE COURSE OF ACTION IN RESPECT OF THE SAID ORDER OF LD. C.I.T.( A); WHO ADVISED THAT THE ORDER IS AN APPEALABLE ORDER IN HENCE WE NEED TO FILE AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL. 9. THAT HAVING COME TO KNOW OF OUR DUTY TO FILE AN APPEAL, AS AFORESAID, THE RELEVANT PAPERS IN RELATION TO THE ABOVE MATTER WERE HANDED OVER TO OUR LAWYER FOR PREPARATION AND F BEEN FILED ON 26.11.2019 AND IN THE PROCESS THIS DELAY OF 198 DAYS BEYOND THE PRESCRIBED DUE DATE HAS OCCURRED. 10. T HAT, THERE WAS NO MALA FIDE INTENTION BEHIND NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME, SUFFER ER BY PAYING ADDITIONAL INCOME TAX. TAXABLE AT ALL UNDER THE ACT. 11. TH AT THE UNINTENTIONAL DELAY OF 196 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE H TRIBUNAL IS FOR GOOD AND SUFFICIENT REASON AND THERE WAS NO INTENTIONAL MOTIVE IN FILING THE APPEAL COMPANY WOULD NOT HAVE GAINED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER. 12. THAT TO MEET THE CAUSE BE PREFERRED AND THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ALONG WITH APPEAL PAPERS IN MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL, PRAYING CONDONATION OF SUCH UNINTENTIONAL APPEAL FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. 13. THAT THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. 4.1. KEEPING IN VIEW THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AS ABOVE IN THE AFFIDAVIT FILED DURING THE COURSE OF APPEL THAT THERE WAS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DELAY OF 200 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING OF THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AS WELL AS FOR THE NON PART OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). EVEN THE LD. D/R HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION IN THIS REGARD. HE, HOWEVER, HAS CONTENDED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE SENT BACK TO THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DISPOSING OFF THE 3 ULTIMATELY TRACED IN THE MIXED BUNDLE OF PAPERS. IT WAS, THEREFORE NOT KNOWN ORDER WAS ACTUALLY SERVED ON THE PETITIONER - ASSESSEE THAT ON THE ABOVE FACTS, THEREFORE, A PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IS BEING FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL CONSIDERING THE DATE 11.03.2019, ON WHICH DATE THE SAID ORDER WAS UPLOADED TO THE WE BSITE. THAT BEING SO, THE APPEAL BEFORE THIS BLE TRIBUNAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED WITHIN 10.05.2019. HOWEVER, THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ON 26.11.2019, RESULTING IN A DELAY OF 198 DAYS BEYOND THE PRESCRIBED DUE DATE. THE NEW ACCOUNTANT CAME TO KNOW ONLY ON 11.09.2019 ABOUT THE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 30.01.2019 WHEN HE WAS E - FILING A REPLY TO NOTICE FOR A.Y. 18. HE WAS ALSO BUSY WITH TAX AUDIT REPORT OF THE COMPANY FOR F.Y.2018 19 AND OTHER COMP ANIES OF THE GROUP AND E-FILING OF THE SAME. THAT THEREAFTER ON APPROVAL FROM THE MANAGEMENT, THE ACCOUNTANT CONSULTED THE LAWYER ABOUT THE FUTURE COURSE OF ACTION IN RESPECT OF THE SAID ORDER OF LD. A); WHO ADVISED THAT THE ORDER IS AN APPEALABLE ORDER IN HENCE WE NEED TO FILE AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL. THAT HAVING COME TO KNOW OF OUR DUTY TO FILE AN APPEAL, AS AFORESAID, THE RELEVANT PAPERS IN RELATION TO THE ABOVE MATTER WERE HANDED OVER TO OUR LAWYER FOR PREPARATION AND F ILING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THIS HON BLE TRIBUNAL, WHICH HAS BEEN FILED ON 26.11.2019 AND IN THE PROCESS THIS DELAY OF 198 DAYS BEYOND THE PRESCRIBED DUE DATE HAS OCCURRED. HAT, THERE WAS NO MALA FIDE INTENTION BEHIND NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME, BECAUSE IN THAT CASE THE PETITIONER- COMPANY WOULD BE THE ER BY PAYING ADDITIONAL INCOME TAX. O N SUCH AN INCOME WHICH IS NOT TAXABLE AT ALL UNDER THE ACT. AT THE UNINTENTIONAL DELAY OF 196 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE H FOR GOOD AND SUFFICIENT REASON AND THERE WAS NO INTENTIONAL MOTIVE IN FILING THE APPEAL B ELATEDLY, INASMUCH AS THAT WOULD RESULT IN SERIOUS RISK AND THE COMPANY WOULD NOT HAVE GAINED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER. THAT TO MEET THE CAUSE OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS SHOULD NOT BE PREFERRED AND THE ASSESSEE - COMPANY HAS THUS FILED A CONDONATION PETITION BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ALONG WITH APPEAL PAPERS IN MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL, PRAYING CONDONATION OF SUCH UNINTENTIONAL DELAY AND ADMISSION OF THE APPEAL FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. THAT THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. KEEPING IN VIEW THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AS ABOVE IN THE AFFIDAVIT FILED DURING THE COURSE OF APPEL LATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DELAY OF 200 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING OF THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AS WELL AS FOR THE NON - COMPLIANCE ON THE THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). EVEN THE LD. D/R HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION IN THIS REGARD. HE, HOWEVER, HAS CONTENDED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE SENT BACK TO THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DISPOSING OFF THE ITA NO. 2504/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2012-13 INVESCO FINANCE PVT. LTD. ULTIMATELY TRACED IN THE MIXED BUNDLE OF PAPERS. IT WAS, THEREFORE NOT KNOWN ASSESSEE . THAT ON THE ABOVE FACTS, THEREFORE, A PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IS BEING FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL CONSIDERING THE DATE 11.03.2019, ON WHICH DATE SO, THE APPEAL BEFORE THIS BLE TRIBUNAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED WITHIN 10.05.2019. HOWEVER, THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ON 26.11.2019, RESULTING IN A DELAY OF THE NEW ACCOUNTANT CAME TO KNOW ONLY ON 11.09.2019 ABOUT THE IMPUGNED FILING A REPLY TO NOTICE FOR A.Y. 18. HE WAS ALSO BUSY WITH TAX AUDIT REPORT OF THE COMPANY FOR F.Y.2018 - THAT THEREAFTER ON APPROVAL FROM THE MANAGEMENT, THE ACCOUNTANT CONSULTED THE LAWYER ABOUT THE FUTURE COURSE OF ACTION IN RESPECT OF THE SAID ORDER OF LD. A); WHO ADVISED THAT THE ORDER IS AN APPEALABLE ORDER IN DEPENDENTLY AND THAT HAVING COME TO KNOW OF OUR DUTY TO FILE AN APPEAL, AS AFORESAID, THE RELEVANT PAPERS IN RELATION TO THE ABOVE MATTER WERE HANDED OVER TO OUR LAWYER BLE TRIBUNAL, WHICH HAS BEEN FILED ON 26.11.2019 AND IN THE PROCESS THIS DELAY OF 198 DAYS BEYOND THE HAT, THERE WAS NO MALA FIDE INTENTION BEHIND NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE COMPANY WOULD BE THE N SUCH AN INCOME WHICH IS NOT AT THE UNINTENTIONAL DELAY OF 196 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE H ON'BLE FOR GOOD AND SUFFICIENT REASON AND THERE WAS NO INTENTIONAL MOTIVE IN ELATEDLY, INASMUCH AS THAT WOULD RESULT IN SERIOUS RISK AND THE OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS SHOULD NOT COMPANY HAS THUS FILED A CONDONATION PETITION BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ALONG WITH APPEAL PAPERS IN MEMORANDUM OF AND ADMISSION OF THE THAT THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. KEEPING IN VIEW THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AS ABOVE IN THE AFFIDAVIT LATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DELAY OF 200 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE COMPLIANCE ON THE THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). EVEN THE LD. D/R HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION IN THIS REGARD. HE, HOWEVER, HAS CONTENDED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE SENT BACK TO THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERIT. T FILING OF THIS APPEAL IS ACCORDINGLY CONDONED AND PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) , WE REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE LD. CIT(A) THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. AS UNDERTAKEN BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE SHALL MAKE DUE COMPLIANCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND SHALL EXTEND ALL POSSIBLE COOPERATION IN ORDER TO ENABL APPEAL AFRESH ON MERITS EXPEDITIOUSLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON SD/- [S.S. GODARA] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 10.06.2020 {SC SPS} COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. INVESCO FINANCE PVT. LTD 35, C.R. AVENUE KOLKATA 700 012 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. 4 APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERIT. T HE DELAY OF 200 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN FILING OF THIS APPEAL IS ACCORDINGLY CONDONED AND SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER , WE REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH ON MERIT AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. AS UNDERTAKEN BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE SHALL MAKE DUE COMPLIANCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND SHALL EXTEND ALL POSSIBLE COOPERATION IN ORDER TO ENABL E THE LD. CIT(A) TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL AFRESH ON MERITS EXPEDITIOUSLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 10 TH DAY OF JUNE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(2) KOLKATA 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES ITA NO. 2504/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2012-13 INVESCO FINANCE PVT. LTD. HE DELAY OF 200 DAYS ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER FOR DISPOSING OFF ON MERIT AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. AS UNDERTAKEN BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE SHALL MAKE DUE COMPLIANCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND SHALL E THE LD. CIT(A) TO DISPOSE OFF THE JUNE , 2020. SD/- [ P.M. JAGTAP ] VICE PRESIDENT TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES