SHRI A.S. ABDUL REHMAN, CHENNAI V. ITO, NCW - 8 (5), CHENNAI

ITA 319/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8670 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G SURESH PERIASAMY
• Assessee Lawyers: P RAJASEKARAN
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 201; 22

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: CHENNAI , , BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I . T . A NO. 319 /CHNY/20 20 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 201 1 - 20 1 2 SHRI. A.S. ABDUL REHMAN, NO.59, C.K. COMPLEX, KARAYANCHAVADI POST, POONAMALLEE TALUK, T.N PIN CODE 600 056. [PAN: AJEPA 9347F ] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON - CORPORATE WARD - 8(5) , NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI 600 034. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : M R . P. RAJASEKARAN , C.A. /RESPONDENT BY : M R . G. SURESH PERIASAMY , J CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 1 9 .07 .2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22 . 0 7 .2021 / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , (APPEALS) - 9 , CHENNAI IN I.T.A . NO. 34 /CIT(A) - 9/2018 - 19 DATED 12 . 06 .201 9 RELE VANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 1 - 201 2 . I . T . A NO . 319 /CHNY/20 20 : - 2 - : 2. THERE IS A DELAY OF 183 DAYS IN FILING THIS APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN AFFIDAVIT, WHEREIN HE HAS S TATED DETAILED REASONS FOR THE DELAY AND HAD REQUESTED THA T THE SAME MAY BE CONDONED. THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IS EXTRACTED AS UNDER: THE APPELLANT PREFERRED AN APPEAL ON 28.01.2019 BEFORE THE HONBLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 9 WITH THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS, VIZ. FORM 35 ALONG WITH STATE MENT OF FACTS, GROUNDS OF APPEAL, ASSESSMENT ORDER, DEMAND NOTICE, FEES PAID CHALLAN. HOWEVER, WHILE ATTACHING THE DOCUMENTS FOR ASSESSMENT ORDER, NOTICE OF DEMAND AND APPEAL FEE OF RS.1000, DUE TO INADVERTENT CLERICAL MISTAKE ON THE PART OF THE DATA ENTR Y OPERATOR, THESE THREE DOCUMENTS, VIZ. ASSESSMENT ORDER, NOTICE OF DEMAND U/S.156 AND THE APPEAL FEE RELATING TO ANOTHER ASSESSEE VIZ. SHRI A. ELUMALAI (WHOSE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS ALSO PASSED IN DECEMBER 2018) WERE ATTACHED WITH THE ABOVE SAID APPEAL OF T HE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT WAS NOT GIVEN NOTICE FOR RECTIFYING THE ABOVE APPARENT MISTAKE BY THE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). THE HONBLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS POSTED THE COSE ON 05.06.2019 FOR WHICH THE APPELLA NTS REPRESENTATIVE WANTED TO MEET THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND TO SUBMIT THE RELATED DOCUMENTS AND RECTIFY THE ABOVE MENTIONED APPARENT MISTAKE IN FILLING OF THE APPEAL PAPERS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WITHOUT GIVING ANY O PPORTUNITY EITHER FOR RECTIFYING THE ABOVE SAID APPARENT MISTAKE OR FOR SUBMITTING THE FACTS OF THE CASE HURRIEDLY PASSED THE ORDER DISMISSING THE APPEALS ON 12.06.2019. IN FACT, ON THE DATE OF THE HEARING ON 05.06.2019, THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE WAS PRESENT IN THE WAITING HALL UNTIL 7:00 PM AND THEN SENT AN ADJOURNMENT ONLINE BY 7:14 PM. COPY OF WHICH IS ENCLOSED. THE RECTIFIED APPEAL PAPERS WITH CORRECT ATTACHMENTS WERE SUBMITTED TO THE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ON 01.07.201 9 IN PERSON. TO MY SURPRISE, I HAVE RECEIVED MY ORDER DATED 12.067.2019 INFORMING THAT THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED ON THE BASIS OF APPARENT / TECHNICAL MISTAKES. THE APPELLANT PREFERRED A MISCELLANEOUS / RECTIFICATION PETITION DATED 321.07.2019 (COPY IS ENC LOSED) ALONG WITH A FEE OF RS.50/ - . THE APPELLANT WAS WAITING FOR SIX MONTHS TO GET A REPLY FROM THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR THE RECTIFICATION PETITION BUT WAS NOT GIVEN ANY NOTICE / ORDER. THE APPELLANT WAS ADVISED BY HIS COUNSEL TO PRE FER AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND ACCORDINGLY THE APPELLANT FILED THE APPEAL I . T . A NO . 319 /CHNY/20 20 : - 3 - : PAPERS IN FORM 36 ALONG WITH THE STATEMENT OF FACTS, GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND REQUISITE FEE OF RS.10,000/ - ON 10.02.2020. THE APPELLANT WAS UNDER THE BONAFIDE IMPRESSION THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WOULD GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECTIFY THE APPARENT MISTAKES AND PASS THE ORDER. THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT DUE TO THE ABOVE SAID CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ALLEGED DELAY IN 183 DAYS IN FILING O F APPEALS BEFORE THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLANT TRIBUNAL IS NEITHER WILLFUL NOR WANTON. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE DELAY I N FILLING APPEALS BEFORE THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLANT TRIBUNAL BE CONDONED AND JUSTICE BE RENDERED. 3 . FROM THE ABOVE REA SONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE , IT IS TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD DISMISSED THE APPEAL ON TECHNICAL GROUNDS AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED A PETITION U/S.154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND HAD WAITED FOR SOME PERIOD AND ULTIMATELY TH IS APPEAL WAS FILED. WE FIND FROM THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO CONDONE THE DELAY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DELAY IS CONDONED. 4. AS FAR AS THE MERITS OF THE CASE IS CONCERNED, THE LEARNED COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT REQUISITE FEE WAS NOT PAID. WE FIND THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS TO BE ADJUDICATED BY CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF THE CASE. I . T . A NO . 319 /CHNY/20 20 : - 4 - : A CCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) TO ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEA L O F THE ASSESSEE IN I.T.A . NO. 319 /CHNY/20 20 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 22 ND JULY , 2021 IN CHENNAI. SD/ - ( ) ( G. MANJUNATHA) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - ( ) ( V. DURGA RAO ) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / CHENNAI, / DATED: 22 ND JULY , 2021 IA , SR. PS / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / CIT(A) 4. / CIT 5. / DR 6. / GF