Shri Manoj Agarwal, New Delhi V. ITO, Dehradun

ITA 2634/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6511 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 08-03-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 10-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BEDOBINA CHAUDHARI
• Section: 32; 147; 131; 68; 246; 69; 145; 27; 148; 54; 37; 6; 56; 263; 63; 132; 12; 28; 144; 10; 90; 154; 2; 11; 15; 271(1)(b); 139; 92

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 2634 /DEL./201 6 ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 20 10 - 1 1 PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH SM C NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMB E R ITA NO. 2 6 34 /DEL./201 6 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 10 - 1 1 MANOJ AGARWAL 211, LSC, PKT - B, ASHOK VIHAR, PHASE - III, NEW DELHI VS. ITO WARD - 1(4), DEHRADUN (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) (PAN: A AFTS0892P ) ASSESSEE BY: SH . SAURAV ROHTGI, C. A . REVENUE BY: MS. BEDOBINA CHAUDHARI, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 0 8 / 0 3 /201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 0 9 / 0 3 /201 7 ORDER PER B.P. JAIN , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES FROM THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) , DEHRADUN VIDE ORDER DATED 1 . 1 .201 6 FOR THE A.Y. 20 10 - 1 1 . THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : - 1. THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS BAD IN LAW AS WELL AS MERITS. 2. THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND PROCEEDINGS ARE WITHOUT JURISDICTION. 3. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AS WELL ON FACTS IN NOT CONDONING THE DELAY OF 11 MONTHS. PAGE 2 OF 4 4. THAT UNDER THE FACTS AN CIR CUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL IN LIMINIE BY REJECTING THE CONDONATION APPLICATION. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WHICH IS DELAYED BY 11 MONTHS. IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSMENT HAS NOT BEEN SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AND ONLY THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT SLIP WAS G OT SIGNED FROM THE ASSESSEE . 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSE D THE FACTS OF THE CASE. IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RECEIVE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE THE APPEAL IN TIME. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO PRESENT IN THE COURT WHO STATED THAT ONLY THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT SLIP WAS GOT SIGNED BY THE NOTICE SERVER WITH A PROMISE THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WILL BE SENT LATER ON, THIS IS SUCH A STATEMENT WHICH CANNOT BE BELIEVE D BY ANYBODY. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SUFFICIENT CAUSE ESTABLISHED BY THE ASSESSEE I DON T FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS RIGHTLY NOT CONDONED THE DELAY . T HUS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PAGE 3 OF 4 4 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 7 . P RONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09 . 0 3 .201 7. S D / - ( B.P. JAIN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMB E R DATED: 09 . 0 3 .2017 NARENDER COPY FORWARDED TO: 1) APPELLANT 2) RESPONDENT 3) CIT 4) CIT (APPEALS) 5) DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR DATE DRAFT DICTATED ON 8 .0 3 .2017 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 9 .0 3 .2017 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. PAGE 4 OF 4 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 9 .3.2017 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 9 .3.2017 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.