Sri Sri Raghavendra Gurusarva Bhoumara Seva Trust , Mandya V. Assistant Commissioner of income tax CPC , Bangalore

ITA 2518/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4085 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 04-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKAS SURYAVANSHI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay
• Section: 154; 11; 15; 234B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO S . 2518 & 2519/BANG/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2014 - 15 & 2015 - 16 SRI SRI RAGHAVENDRA GURUSARVA BHOUMARA SEVA TRUST, FORT STREET, MADDUR. MANDYA DISTRICT. 571 428. PAN: AAAAS 8431N VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE. APP ELLANT RESPONDENT APP ELLANT BY : SHRI SURESH MUTHUKRISHNAN, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIKAS K. SURYAVAMSHI, ADDL.CIT(DR)(ITA T), BENGALURU. DATE OF HEARING : 03 . 1 0.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12 .10. 2018 O R D E R THESE ARE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TWO ORDERS, BOTH DATED 28.06.2018 OF THE CIT(APPEALS), MYSORE RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2014-15 & 2015-16. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A TRUST. FOR THE AYS 2014-15 & 2015-16, THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURNS OF INCOME ON 21.7.2014 AND 1 4.8.2015 RESPECTIVELY, DECLARING INCOME UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES OF RS.1,67,406 AND RS.1,30,526 AND TAX PAYABLE AT NIL. THE RETURNS WERE PROCESSED BY THE CENTRALISED PROCESSING CENTRE (CPC ) OF THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT. AN INTIMATION U/S. 143(1) OF THE INCOM E-TAX ACT, 1961 [THE ACT] DATED 19.2.2016 AND 15.9.2016 FOR THE AYS 201 4-15 & 2015-16 ITA NOS.2518 & 2519/BANG/2018 PAGE 2 OF 4 RESPECTIVELY WAS ISSUED BY THE CPC, ACCEPTING THE I NCOME RETURNED BY THE ASSESSEE, BUT DID NOT ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESS EE FOR NIL TAX PAYABLE. IN THE INTIMATION THE TAX PAYABLE ON RETURNED INCOM E WAS DETERMINED AT RS.50,223 AND RS.40,334 FOR THE AY 2014-15 & 2015-1 6 RESPECTIVELY, BESIDES INTEREST U/S. 234B & 234C OF THE ACT. 3. AGAINST THE INTIMATIONS U/S. 143(1) OF THE ACT D ATED 19.2.2016 AND 15.9.2016 FOR THE AYS 2014-15 & 2015-16, THE ASSESS EE FILED APPEALS BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). THE APPEALS BEFORE THE CI T(APPEALS) WERE FILED ON 6.4.2017. THERE WAS A DELAY OF ABOUT 380 DAYS I N FILING THE APPEAL FOR THE AYS 2014-15 AND 172 DAYS DELAY IN FILING THE AP PEAL FOR THE AY 2015-16 BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE WER E FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON 17.5.2018 AND 12.6.2018. ON B OTH THE DATES FIXED FOR HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. T HE CIT(A) FOUND THAT THERE WAS APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN F LING THE APPEALS, BUT HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE REASONS GIVEN FOR THE DELA Y IN FILING THE APPEALS WERE ATTRIBUTED TO THE DELAY ON THE PART OF THE TAX CONSULTANT WAS SELF- SERVING STATEMENT WHICH WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY CR EDIBLE OR VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE NOR WAS THERE ANY ADMISSION BY THE TAX CON SULTANTS THAT THEY WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DELAY. IN THE CIRCUMSTANC ES, THE CIT(A) REFUSED TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS AND DISMISS ED THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IN GROUND N O.2, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED A GROUND REGARDING CIT(A)S ACTION IN NO T AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE DELAY IN FILIN G THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE WAS PURSUING AN ALT ERNATIVE REMEDY ITA NOS.2518 & 2519/BANG/2018 PAGE 3 OF 4 BEFORE THE AO BY FILLING APPLICATION U/S. 154 OF TH E ACT. MY ATTENTION WAS DRAWN TO THE FOLLOWING DATES AND EVENTS:- DATE EVENT 21/07/14 DATE OF FILING RETURN OF INCOME AY 2014-15 DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,67,410/- 19/02/16 DATE OF INTIMATION U/S.143(1) FROM CPC WITH DEMAND OF RS. 65,534/-, THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 09/05/16 DATE OF APPLICATION U/S.154 FILED ONLINE WITH CPC THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED REPLY FROM CPC STATING THAT: ONLY TRUSTS REGISTERED U/S.12A/12AA I.E. TRUST WHOSE INCOME EXCEEDS THE AMOUNT WHICH IS NOT CHARGEABLE TO INCOME TAX WITHOUT GIVING EFFECT TO PROVISIONS OF SEC 11 AND 1 2 OF THE INCOME TAX ARE REQUIRED TO FILED RETURN IN ITR-7 (139(4A)) AND OTHER TRUSTS ARE REQUIRED TO FILE RETURN IN ITR-5. CPC ADVISED ASSESSEE TO CONTACT JURISDICTION OFFICE R FOR FURTHER CLARIFICATION. 14/12/16 DATE OF FRESH APPLICATION U/S. 154 BEFORE AO SEEKIN G FOR RECTIFICATION OF CPC ORDER. 15/12/16 DATE OF LETTER SENT BY AO SEEKING INFORMATION AND D OCUMENTS. 09/01/17 DATE OF REPLY FILED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LEARNED A.O 31/01/17 DATE OF REJECTION OF THE APPLICATION U/S.154 BY THE LEARNED A.O 06/04/17 APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED U/S. 143(1) O F IT ACT BEFORE CIT(A), MYSURU WITH APPLICATION SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELA Y OF 380 DAYS. 07/07/18 DATE OF ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) MYSURU. DATE EVENT 14/08/2015 DATE OF FILING RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY 2015-16 DECLA RING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,30,530/- 15/09/2016 DATE OF INTIMATION U/S.143(1) FROM CPC WITH DEMAND OF RS. 49,080/-, IMPUGNED ORDER 30/01/2017 DATE OF FRESH APPLICATION U/S,154 BEFORE AO SEEKING FOR RECTIFICATION OF CPC ORDER 09/02/2017 DATE OF REJECTION OF THE APPLICATION U/S. 154 BY TH E LEARNED AO 06/04/2017 APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED U/S. 143(1) O F IT ACT BEFORE CIT(A), MYSURU WITH APPLICATION SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELA Y OF 172 DAYS. 07/07/2018 DATE OF ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) MYSURU. 6. MY ATTENTION WAS ALSO DRAWN TO THE DECISION OF T HE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.823/BANG/2011 DATED 14.6.2013 IN THE CASE OF M/S. GANESH SHIPPING AGENCY AND IN THE CASE OF MR. GLEN WILLIAMS IN ITA NO.1078/BANG/2014 DATED 7.8.2015 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT DELAY IN FILING ITA NOS.2518 & 2519/BANG/2018 PAGE 4 OF 4 APPEAL WHICH IS CAUSED BY PURSUING AN ALTERNATIVE R EMEDY AMOUNTS TO REASONABLE CAUSE. 7. I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE ABOVE SUBMISSION OF TH E ASSESSEE FOR DELAY IN FLING APPEALS BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) REQUIRES C ONSIDERATION BY THE CIT(APPEALS). I AM ALSO OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSES SEE DID NOT HAVE PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. HENCE, I SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(APPEALS) AND REMAND TO THE CIT(APPEALS) FOR FRE SH CONSIDERATION OF THE APPEALS BY CIT(APPEALS) BOTH ON THE GROUND WITH REG ARD TO DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS AND IF THE DELAY IN FILING APPEAL IS CO NDONED TO DECIDE THE APPEALS ON MERIT. I HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. I ALLOW THE APPEALS FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATI STICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 12 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018. SD/- ( N.V. VASUDEVAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 12 TH OCTOBER, 2018. / D ESAI S MURTHY / COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, BANGALORE.