NIRUPA BHIMARAJA, CHENNAI V. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 3(5), CHENNAI

ITA 2992/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2552 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-11-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI , ! . , ! ' BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2992/CHNY/2018 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 SMT. NIRUPA BHIMARAJA, B8, ASWATH APARTMENTS, 16/4, II CRESCENT PARK ST., GANDHI NAGAR, ADYAR, CHENNAI-600 020. [PAN:AHJPB 3592 N] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD-3(5), CHENNAI-34. ( ) /APPELLANT) ( *+) /RESPONDENT) ) , / APPELLANT BY : MR.K.BALASUBRAMANIAN, ADV. *+) , /RESPONDENT BY : MR.SRIDHAR DORA, JCIT , /DATE OF HEARING : 07.03.2019 , /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.03.2019 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-4, CHENNAI, IN ITA NO.141/2017- 18/AY 2011-12/CIT(A)-4 DATED 28.08.2018 FOR THE AY 2011-12 AGAINST CONFIRMING THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S.271(1)(C) OF IT A CT. 2. SHRI SRIDHAR DORA, JCIT, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF O F THE REVENUE AND SHRI K. BALASUBRAMANIAN, ADV., REPRESENTED ON BEHAL F OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.2992/CHNY/2018 :- 2 -: 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DELAYED BY 10 MONTHS AND 23 DAYS, MORE SPECIFIC ALLY 323 DAYS, BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN AF FIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE REASON FOR THE DELAY WHICH HAD BEEN EXTRACTED BY TH E LD.CIT(A) IN PARA NO.12 OF HIS ORDER. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE L D.CIT(A) DID NOT CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL AND HAD C ONSEQUENTLY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS A SUBMISSION TH AT THE DELAY WAS ON ACCOUNT OF THE MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE, WHO IS 71 YE ARS OLD, WHO HAD FORGOTTEN TO GIVE THE COPY OF THE ORDER TO THE ASSE SSEE. IT WAS A PRAYER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS A STRONG CASE FOR CANCELLATIO N OF THE PENALTY. IT WAS A PRAYER THAT THE DELAY MAY BE CONDONED AND THE LD. CIT(A) DIRECTED TO DISPOSE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. 4. IN REPLY, THE LD.DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORD ER OF THE LD.CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. 6. AT THE OUTSET, IT MUST BE APPRECIATED THAT WHEN SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE AND TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS ARE PITTED AGAINST EAC H OTHER, THE CAUSE OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE DESERVES TO BE PREFERRED. IN T HE PRESENT CASE, CLEARLY THE ASSESSEES MOTHER HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT SPECIF ICALLY MENTIONING THAT SHE HAD CAUSED THE DELAY BY HER FAILURE TO GIVE THE COPY OF ORDER TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH SHE HAD MISPLACED. THE ASSESSEES MO THER IS 71 YEARS OLD ITA NO.2992/CHNY/2018 :- 3 -: LADY. THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY HER HAS ALSO NOT BEEN FOUND TO BE FALSE. THIS BEING SO, IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE D ELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE EXTENT OF 323 DAYS IS CONDON ED AND THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT( A) FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 7 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019, IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( S. JAYARAMAN ) ! /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) ! /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 3 /DATED: 7 TH MARCH, 2019. TLN , *45 65 /COPY TO: 1. ) /APPELLANT 4. 7 /CIT 2. *+) /RESPONDENT 5. 5 * /DR 3. 7 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF