Bhagwati Devi Family Fund Trust, Jaipur V. Dcit , cpc, Bangalore

ITA 36/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7640 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-08-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 08-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(1)

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENC HES, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRA M SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 36/JP/2019 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR :2013-14 BHAGWATI DEVI FAMILY FUND TRUST B-107, JANTA COLONY, JAIPUR CUKE VS. DCIT, CPC, B-107, JANTA COLONY, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AABTB8907G VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : MS. CHANCHAL MEENA (ADDL. CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 26/08/2020 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 27/08/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-03, JAIPUR DATED 06.03.2018 FOR ASSESSME NT YEAR 2013-14. 2. THE HEARING OF THE MATTER WAS SCHEDULED FOR TODA Y THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING IN VIEW OF THE ONGOING COVID-19 PANDEM IC SITUATION IN THE COUNTRY. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS RECEIVED BY THE REGISTRY WHICH WAS SIGNED BY THE A/R ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE STATING THAT DUE TO SOME URG ENT FAMILY HEALTH ISSUES, THE MATTER MAY BE ADJOURNED. 3. THE LD. DR IS HEARD WHO HAS DRAWN OUR REFERENCE TO THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT ON AS MANY AS THREE OCCAS IONS, OPPORTUNITY HAS ITA NO. 36/JP/2019 BHAGWATI DEVI FAMILY FUND TRUST VS. DCIT, JAIPUR 2 BEEN PROVIDED BY THE LD CIT(A), HOWEVER, NO ONE HAD ATTENDED THE HEARING AND NO WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WERE FILED AND THE MATTE R WAS ACCORDINGLY DECIDED BY THE LD CIT(A). IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT EV EN BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE MATTER HAS BEEN LISTED IN THE PAST, HOWEVER, THE AU THORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAS SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT FROM TIME TO TIME AND EVEN TODAY , WHEN THE MATTER WAS LISTED FOR HEARING, AN ADJOURNMENT HAS BEEN SOUGHT. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT MORE THAN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY HAS B EEN PROVIDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE TRIBUNAL, NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED IN PROVIDING FURTHER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PURUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 5. AT THE OUTSET, WE NOTE THAT THERE HAS BEEN A DEL AY IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL BY 242 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A CONDO NATION APPLICATION ALONG WITH AN AFFIDAVIT STATING THAT DUE TO WRONG ADVICE GIVEN BY A CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, THE APPEAL COULDNT BE FILED, HOWEVER, DUE TO SUBSEQUENT ADVICE RECEIVED FROM ANOTHER CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, THE ASS ESSEE HAS MOVED THE PRESENT APPEAL AND THE DELAY SO HAPPENED IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL MAY BE CONDONED. 6. THE LD DR IS HEARD WHO HAS OPPOSED THE CONDONATI ON APPLICATION AND SUBMITTED THAT NO REASONABLE CAUSE IS DEMONSTRATED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE DELAY IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL. 7. WE FIND THAT IN CASE OF COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISIT ION VS MST KATIJI (1987) 167 ITR 471, THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT HAS HELD THA T THE EXPRESSION SUFFICIENT CAUSE EMPLOYED BY THE LEGISLATURE IS A DEQUATELY ELASTIC TO ENABLE THE COURTS TO APPLY THE LAW IN A MEANINGFUL MANNER TO SUB-SERVES THE ENDS OF JUSTICE THAT BEING THE LIFE-PURPOSE OF THE EXISTENC E OF THE INSTITUTION OF COURTS. ITA NO. 36/JP/2019 BHAGWATI DEVI FAMILY FUND TRUST VS. DCIT, JAIPUR 3 IT WAS FURTHER HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT TH AT SUCH LIBERAL APPROACH IS ADOPTED ON ONE OF THE PRINCIPLES THAT REFUSING TO C ONDONE DELAY CAN RESULT IN A MERITORIOUS MATTER BEING THROWN OUT AT THE VERY THR ESHOLD AND CAUSE OF JUSTICE BEING DEFEATED. AS AGAINST THIS, WHEN DELAY IS COND ONED, THE HIGHEST THAT CAN HAPPEN IS THAT A CAUSE WOULD BE DECIDED ON MERITS A FTER HEARING THE PARTIES. ANOTHER PRINCIPLE LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IS THAT WHEN SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE AND TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS AR E PITTED AGAINST EACH OTHER, THE CAUSE OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE DESERVES TO BE PRE FERRED FOR THE OTHER SIDE CANNOT CLAIM TO HAVE VESTED RIGHT IN INJUSTICE BEIN G DONE BECAUSE OF A NON- DELIBERATE DELAY. IT WAS ALSO HELD BY THE HONBLE S UPREME COURT THAT THERE IS NO PRESUMPTION THAT DELAY IS OCCASIONED DELIBERATEL Y, OR ON ACCOUNT OF CULPABLE NEGLIGENCE, OR ON ACCOUNT OF MALE FIDES. A LITIGANT DOES NOT STAND TO BENEFIT BY RESORTING TO DELAY. IN FACT, HE RUNS A S ERIOUS RISK. IN THE INSTANT CASE, APPLYING THE SAME PRINCIPLES, WE FIND THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAS ALL ALONG ACTED DILIGENTLY IN SAFEGUARDING ITS LEGAL RIGHTS A ND AVAILING THE REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO IT AND HAS ACTED AND TAKEN ACTION BASI S THE ADVICE AND ASSISTANCE SOUGHT FROM ITS CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT. HE WAS INITI ALLY ADVISED NOT TO FILE AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AS THE MATTER RELATES TO PROCESSING OF RETURN OF INCOME AND THEREAFTER, HE WAS ADVISED TO FILE THE P RESENT APPEAL AS THERE IS NO LEGAL BAR IN FILING THE APPEAL AGAINST THE DEMAN D RAISED IN TERMS OF PROCESSING OF RETURN OF INCOME AND INTIMATION ISSUE D U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT. WE FIND THAT THERE IS NO CULPABLE NEGLIGENCE OR MAL AFIDE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN DELAYED FILING OF THE PRESENT APPEAL AN D IT DOES NOT STAND TO BENEFIT BY RESORTING TO SUCH DELAY. ON MERITS AS WE LL WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE ISSUE OF CHARGEABILITY OF TAX AT THE MAX IMUM MARGINAL RATE VIS--VIS THE SLAB RATE OF TAXATION AS APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF BENEFICIARY OF TRUST, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE DESERVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD ONCE AND THE MATTER SHOULDNT BE DISMISSED ON MERE TECHNICALITY. THEREFORE, IN THE FACTS ITA NO. 36/JP/2019 BHAGWATI DEVI FAMILY FUND TRUST VS. DCIT, JAIPUR 4 AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, THE DELAY IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL IS CONDONED AND THE APPEAL IS ADMITTED FOR ADJUDICATIO N. 8. WE FIND THAT PURSUANT TO FILING OF RETURN OF INC OME BY THE ASSESSEE ON 6.2.2014 WHICH WAS PROCESSED BY THE CPC AND AN INTI MATION U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED RAISING A DEMAND OF RS 25,950/- ON T HE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS BEEN CONTESTED IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD CIT(A). THE MATTER HAS BEEN LISTED FOR HEARING ON COUPLE OF OCCASIONS HOWEVER THERE HAS BE EN NO COMPLIANCE ON PART OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE MATTER HAS THEREAFTER BEEN DECIDED EX-PARTE BY THE LD CIT(A). HOWEVER, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS T HAT THE APPEAL HAS NOT BEEN DECIDED ON MERITS AND IN ABSENCE OF FINDINGS OF THE LD CIT(A), NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED IN ADJOURNING THE MATTER AN Y FURTHER AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY, WE DEEM IT APPRO PRIATE TO REMAND THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD CIT(A) TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OP PORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PUT FORWARD ITS CONTENTIONS AND SUBMISSIONS WHICH S HALL BE DECIDED ON MERITS AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSES SEE. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27/08/2020. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 27/08/2020 * GANESH KR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- BHAGWATI DEVI FAMILY FUND TRUST, JAI PUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- DCIT, JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) ITA NO. 36/JP/2019 BHAGWATI DEVI FAMILY FUND TRUST VS. DCIT, JAIPUR 5 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 36/JP/2019} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR