Bhavesh B Mehta, Bengaluru V. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6(3)(1), Bengaluru

ITA 2759/BANG/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5391 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K N DHANDA
• Assessee Lawyers: SUNIL D SURANA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH A (SMC) BEFORE SHRI N.V VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.2759, 2760, 2762 & 2763/ BANG/2017 (ASST. YEAR 200-10) 1. BHAVESH B MEHTA, PAN AIQPM5367E 2. BIPIN J MEHTA, PAN AAEHB7515F 3.JAYASHREE B MEHTA, PAN - AFRPM8683F 4.KANAK B MEHTA, PAN - AIWPM 7263M NO.589, CHANDA, 1 ST CROSS, II BLOCK, RT NAGAR, BENGALURU. . APPELLANTS VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(3)(1), BENGALURU. . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUNIL D SURANA, C.A RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.N DHANDAPANI, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 08-03-2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28-03-2018 O R D E R PER SHRI N.V VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THESE ARE APPEALS BY FOUR DIFFERENT ASSESSES AGAIN ST THE FOUR DIFFERENT ORDERS DATED 1/11/2017 AND 2/11/2017 OF C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) -7 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. ITA NOS.2759, 2760, 2762 & 2763/ B/17 2 2. THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.2760/BANG/2017 IS AN HUF. THE ASSESSES IN OTHER APPEALS ARE INDIVIDUALS. THE ASS ESSMENT IN THE CASE OF ALL THE ASSESSEES WAS COMPLETED BY THE AO FOR AS SESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT. ALL THE O RDERS WERE DATED 30/10/2014. 3. AGAINST THE ORDERS OF ASSESSMENT AND THE DETERMI NATION OF TOTAL INCOME BY THE AO, THE ASSESSEES PREFERRED APPEALS B EFORE THE CIT(A). THERE WAS A DELAY OF 6 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BY EACH OF THE ASSESSEES BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE APPEAL OF THE ASS ESSEE IN ITA NO.2759/BANG/2017 WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON 10/10/2017. APPEAL IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.2760 AND 2762/BANG/2017 WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE CIT (A) ON 11/10/2017. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.2 763/BANG/2017 WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON 25/10/20 17. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT ON THE AFORESAID DATE FIXED FOR HEARIN G BEFORE THE CIT(A) NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A ) IN HIS ORDER WAS REFERRED TO THE FACT THAT EVEN ON 3 EARLIER OCCASIO NS WHEN THE APPEALS WERE FIXED FOR HEARING NONE HAD APPEARED BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) THEREFORE PROCEEDED TO DECIDE THE PROCEEDING S AND TO DECIDE THE APPEAL EX-PARTE. THE CIT(A) NOTICED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAD NOT EVEN FILED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FLING THE APPEAL. THE CIT(A), THEREFORE HELD THAT SINCE NO APPLICATIO N FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY HAD BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESEE ITSELF IS INVALID. ALL THE APPEALS WERE ACCORDINGLY DISMI SSED BY THE CIT(A). ITA NOS.2759, 2760, 2762 & 2763/ B/17 3 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A), THE ASSES SEES HAVE PREFERRED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MR. SUNIL D SURANA SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE CASE OF ALL THE FOUR ASSESSEES WERE DEALT BY M/S DHARIWALL A AND SRINIVASAN, C.A FIRM. MR. SUNIL D SURANA WAS PARTNER IN THE SA ID FIRM AND HE RETIRED FROM THE FIRM ON 5/4/2014. HE WAS HANDLING THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE ASSESSMENT STAGE AND THEREAFTER ONE MR. PRAKSH S SHAN, C.A PARTNER OF DHARIWALLA AND SRINIVAS, C.A WAS HA NDLING THE AFFAIRS OF ALL THE FOUR ASSESSEES. MR. PRAKASH S SHAH RETI RED FROM THE FIRM OF DHARIWALLA AND SRINIVAS, C.A ON 1/10/2017. AFTER T HE RETIREMENT OF MR. PRAKASH S SHAH FORM THE FIRM, NO OTHER PERSON A TTENDED TO THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSES. THE PRAYER OF THE LD COU NSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT IN THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ORDER OF T HE CIT(A) SHOULD BE SET ASIDE AND THE ASSESSEES SHOULD BE PERMITTED TO FILE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. THE CIT(A) SHOULD CONSIDER THE SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DELAY IN FILI NG THE APPEALS BEFORE HIM AND IF HE FINDS SUFFICIENT CAUSE THEN THE DELAY SHOULD BE CONDONED AND THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES SHOULD BE DECIDED ON MERITS ON VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSES IN THEIR APPEALS. 5. THE LD DR OPPOSED THE PRAYER OF THE LD COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE FOR REMAND TO THE CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IN OU R VIEW THERE WAS REASONABLE AND SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE ASSESSE ES NON APPEARANCE BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON THE DATES ON WHICH THE APPEALS WERE FIXED FOR HEARING. WE THEREFORE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) AND REMAND ITA NOS.2759, 2760, 2762 & 2763/ B/17 4 TO THE CIT(A) THE QUESTION OF CONDONATION OF DELAY FOR FILING THE APPEALS. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE N ECESSARY APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS. T HE CIT(A) WILL CONSIDER THE REASONS GIVEN FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS AND IF THE DELAY IS FOUND TO BE DUE TO SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE C IT(A) MAY TAKE UP THE VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSE ES CHALLENGING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO. THE CIT(A) WILL AFFORD O PPORTUNITY OF FAIR HEARING TO THE ASSESSES. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSES. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28TH MARCH, 2018 . SD/- SD/- (JASON P BOAZ) (N. V VASUDEVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMB ER BANGALORE DATED : 28/3/2018 VMS COPY TO :1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE REVENUE 3.THE CIT CONCERNED. 4.THE CIT(A) CONCERNED. 5.DR 6.GF BY ORDER SR. PRIVAT E SECRETARY, ITAT, BANGALORE ITA NOS.2759, 2760, 2762 & 2763/ B/17 5 1. DATE OF DICTATION 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER . 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO SR. P. S... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER .. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S. .. 6. DATE OF UPLOADING THE ORDER ON WEBSITE .. 7. IF NOT UPLOADED, FURNISH THE REASON FOR DOING SO .. 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 9. DATE ON WHICH ORDER GOES FOR XEROX & ENDORSEMENT.. 10. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 11. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER . 12. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO DISPATCH SEC TION FOR DISPATCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER . 13. DATE OF DESPATCH OF ORDER. ..