Shri Nagaraj , Mysore V. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(2), Mysore

ITA 2957/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7032 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-09-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 07-09-2020
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 31-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R PREMI
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVISHANKAR S V
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause; TDS
• Section: 40(a)(ia); 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES C BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOU NTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2957 /BANG/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 9 - 10 ) SHRI NAGARAJ, NO.46, DAYANAND MANSI ON, 2 ND FLOOR, RING ROAD, CHOWDESHWARI NAGAR, LAGGERE, BANGALORE - 560 058 PAN ACGPN 8331H .APPELLANT VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), MYSURU. RESPONDENT. ASSESSEE BY: SHRI RAVI SHANKAR S V, ADVOCATE. REVENUE BY: S MT. R. PREMI, JCIT (D.R) DATE OF HEARING : 07.09 .20 20. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09 .09 .20 20. O R D E R PER SHRI CHANDRA POO JARI, A M : TH IS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) , MYSURU DT. 23.07.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLL OWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : 2 ITA NO. 2957/BANG/2018 3 ITA NO. 2957/BANG/2018 4 ITA NO. 2957/BANG/2018 3. THE FA CTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A LABOUR CONTRACTOR. THE CONCLUDED ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT ON THE LAST DATE OF LIMITATION I.E. ON 30.03.2016 BY ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE CERTAIN ADDITIONS ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED CONTRACT RECEIPT OF RS.36,48,373 & DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF RS.3,30,400 ON ACCOUNT OF NON - DEDUCTION OF TDS. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL WITH THE CIT (APPEALS). THE CIT (APPEALS) WI THOUT ADJUDICATING THE ISSUES SUMMARILY DISMISSED THE APPEAL FOR NOT HAVING ENCLOSED THE DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 156 AND THEREBY UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LD. AR RELIED ON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CHELAMALA SETTI AD EYYA 54 ITR 339 (AP) WHICH DECISION WAS AGAIN BASED ON O.A.O.K. RM. ARUNACHALAM 45 ITR 407 (MADRAS). FURTHER, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT (APPEALS) ORDER 5 ITA NO. 2957/BANG/2018 IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND THE ORDER TO BE QUASHED. AGGRIEVED BY THE OR DER OF CIT (APPEALS), TH E ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. THERE WAS A DELAY OF 30 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE ASSESSEE FILED CONDONATION PETITION EXPLAINING THE REASON THAT AFTER RECEIVING THE APPELLATE ORDER, IT WAS HANDED OV ER TO AUTHORISED REPRESENTTIVE TO FILE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE PREPARED THE APPEAL AND GAVE IT TO THE ASSESSEE TO FILE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE SENT THE APPEAL TO THE TRIBUNAL OLD OFFICE SITUATED AT KEMPE GO WDA ROAD, BANGALORE INSTEAD OF TILAK NAGAR, BANGALORE ADDRESS. LATER THE ASSESSEE ENQUIRED WITH THE TRIBUNAL OF BANGALORE BENCHES FOR OBTAINING THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF APPEAL BY THE TRIBUNAL AND ALSO DATE OF HEARING. THE TRIBUNAL INFORMED THE ASSESSEE THAT APPEAL PAPERS WERE NOT RECEIVED AT THE OFFICE OF THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE FILED NEW SET OF APPEAL BY HAND ON 31.10.2018. THUS THERE WAS A DELAY OF 30 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. IN OUR OPINION, THERE EXISTS A REASONABLE CAUSE TH AT THE ASSESSEE MISTAKENLY POSTED THIS APPEAL TO THE OLD ADDRESS OF THE TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE CONDONE THE DELAY OF 30 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR ADJUDICATION. 5. THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS PA SSED EX - PARTE UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE ACT ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS). THE CIT (APPEALS) ALSO DISMISSED THE APPEAL EX - PARTE ON THE REASON THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ACCOMPANIED BY THE VALID DEMAND NOT ICE. THE CIT (APPEALS) WOULD HAVE GIVEN DEFECT NOTICE AND GIVE A FAIR OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE TO CORRECT THE DEFECT NOTICE D BY HIM . SINCE THE ORDER WAS PASSED BY THE A.O. IS EX - PARTE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE REMAND THE ENTIRE DISPU TED ISSUE TO THE FILE OF A .O. OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. 6 ITA NO. 2957/BANG/2018 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/ - SD/ - ( N.V . VASUDEVAN ) ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 09 .09. 20 20 . *REDDY GP COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT (A) 4. PR. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE