SHRI R. PALANISAMY (HUF), SALEM V. ITO, WARD - 2 (4), SALEM

ITA 2537/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8544 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 05-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R ANITA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , D B ENCH, CHENNAI . , ' . , ' ( BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.2537/CHNY/2019 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) R.PALANISAMY (HUF) 202/1, PACHAKATTUVALAVU CHAMRAJPET, MECHERI-636 451. SALEM DISTRICT. VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4) SALEM. PAN: AACHR 0740Q ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : NONE /RESPONDENT BY : MS. R.ANITA, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 1 1.08.2021 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.08.2021 / O R D E R PER G.MANJUNATHA, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGA INST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A), SALEM DATED 31. 05.2019 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. AT THE OUTSET, WE FIND THAT THERE IS A DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR 11 DAYS FOR WHICH NECE SSARY PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY HAS BEEN FILED. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTE D THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT FILE APPEAL WITHIN THE TIME ALL OWED UNDER THE ACT, THEREFORE DELAY MAY BE CONDONED. HAVING HE ARD LEARNED DR AND CONSIDERED THE PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT 2 ITA NO. 2537/CHNY/2019 REASONS GIVEN BY ASSESSEE FOR NOT FILING THE APP EAL WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED UNDER THE ACT COMES UNDER REASONABLE CAUSE AS PROVIDED UNDER THE ACT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY A ND HENCE, DELAY IN FILING OF ABOVE APPEAL IS CONDONED AND A PPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ADMITTED FOR ADJUDICATION. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE HEARD LEARNED DR AND ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A LETTER ALONG WITH FORM NO.3 IS SUED BY THE DEPARTMENT UNDER VIVAD SE VISHWAS SCHEME, 2020 AN D SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS AVAILED THE VSVS SC HEME TO SETTLE ITS PENDING DISPUTES. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS ACCEPTED APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ISSUED FORM 3 QUANTIFYING AMOUNT OF TAXES PAYABLE UNDER VSVS SCHEME. THEREFORE, THE LD . COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE MAY BE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. THE LD. DR , ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS NO OBJECTION FOR DISMISSING THE APP EAL AS THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY HAS ISSUED FORM 3. THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AP PLICATION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL AND HAS ALSO FILED FORM 3 ISS UED BY THE 3 ITA NO. 2537/CHNY/2019 DEPARTMENT, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE AS WITHDRAWN. HOWEVER, A LIBERTY IS GIVEN TO THE ASSE SSEE TO RESTORE THE APPEAL, IN CASE THE APPLICATION FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE DESIGNATED AUTHORITY, IS REJECTED FOR AN Y REASON. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH AUGUST, 2021 SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . ) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) (G.MANJUNATHA) $ & / JUDICIAL MEMBER & / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $ /CHENNAI, ) /DATED 11 TH AUGUST, 2021 DS +, -, /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. . () /CIT(A) 4. . /CIT 5. , 2 /DR 6. /GF .