Duddupudi Prasad, Visakhapatnam V. THE ITO, Visakhapatnam

ITA 373/VIZ/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6767 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 21-10-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D JK P ANAND
• Keywords: Bonafide belief; Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO , HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH , HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 373 / VIZ /201 5 (ASST. YEAR : 2009 - 10 ) DUDDUPUDI PRASAD, PROP. KRISHNA PRIYA CONSTRUCTIONS, D.NO. 54 - 12 - 13/2, NEAR KRISHNA COLLEGE, BHANU NAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM. V . IT O , WARD - 3 ( 2 ), VISAKHAPATNAM. PAN NO. AEBPD 9924 K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI G.V.N. HARI ADV OCATE . DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI D.JK.P. ANAND SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 10 / 0 8 /201 7 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 / 0 8 /201 7 . O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 1 , VISAKHAPATNAM , DATED 25 /0 9 /201 5 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 . 2. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT WHETHER LD. CIT(A) REJECTED THE CONDONATION APPLICATION IS CORRECT OR NOT. THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) IS EXTRACTED AS UNDER: - THE ASSESSMENT IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT FOR THE AY 2009 - 10 WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT ON 12/03/2014 AND THE SAME WAS RECEIV ED BY THE APPELLANT ON 03/04/2014 . AS SUCH, APPEAL AGAINST THE REASSESSMENT OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN FILED ON OR BEFORE 2 ITA NO. 373/VIZ/2015 ( DUDDUPUDI PRASAD ) 03/05/2014. HOWEVER, THE APPEAL COULD BE FILED ONLY ON 20/10/2014. THUS, THERE WAS DELAY OF 170 DAYS. THE APPELLANT DID NOT ORIGINALLY CHOOSE TO FILE ANY APPEAL AGAINST THE REASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 12/03/2014, AS APPELLANT ENTERTAINED A BONAFIDE BELIEF THAT PENALTY PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WOULD BE DROPPED. THE BELIEF FORMED BY THE APPEL LANT HAS ITS BASIS IN THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT VOLUNTARILY ADMITTED THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME FILED ON 20/07/2012 MUCH BEFORE THE APPELLANT WAS SERVED WITH A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 ON 20/07/2012. THIS BELIEF WAS REINFORCED WHEN THE APPELLANT WAS INFORMED BY HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER AGREED TO DROP THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. THE APPELLANT WAS SHOCKED WHEN HE RECEIVED ON 02/10/2014 THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 271(1)( C) LEVYING A PENALTY OF 65,29,729/ - . IMMEDIATELY, WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAY, THE APPELLANT TOOK NECESSARY STEPS AND ENSURED THAT THE APPEAL AGAINST REASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 12/03/2014 COULD BE FILED ON 20/10/2014. THUS, THE DELAY OF 170 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL WAS DUE TO REASONS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE APPELLANT AND WAS NEITHER INTENTIONAL N OR DELIBERATE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE STATED FACTS, THE APPELLANT RESPECTFULLY PRAYS TH A T THE DELAY OF 170 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL AGAINST REASSESSMENT ORDERS DATED 12/03/2014 MAY KINDLY BE CONDONED AND APPROPRIATE ORDERS MAY KINDLY BE PASSED. 3 . THE LD. CIT(A) BY CONSIDERING THE DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION HAS HELD THAT APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS FILED ONLY ON ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) WAS IMPOSED , IS NOT A REASON TO CONDONE THE DELAY . THE LD. CIT(A) IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY I.E PENALTY IMPOSED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) IS NOT A SUFFICIENT REASON TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND THE DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. 3 ITA NO. 373/VIZ/2015 ( DUDDUPUDI PRASAD ) 4 . WE FIND THAT THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) AND T HEREFORE, APPEAL IS FILED , WHICH IS NOT A SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO CONDONE THE DELAY . IN OUR OPINION, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO CONDONE THE DELAY OF 170 DAYS AND THEREFORE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON TH IS 1 8 T H DAY OF AUGUST , 201 7 . S D / - S D / - ( D.S. SUNDER SINGH ) ( V. DURGA RAO ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 1 8 T H AUGUST , 201 7 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE - DUDDUPUDI PRASAD, PROP. KRISHNA PRIYA CONSTRUCTIONS, D.NO. 54 - 12 - 13/2, NEAR KRISHNA COLLEGE, BHANU NAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM. 2. THE REVENUE - ITO, WARD - 3(2), VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE CIT - 1 , VISAKHAPATNAM . 4. THE CIT(A) - 1 , VISAKHAPATNAM . 5. THE D.R . , VISAKHAPATNAM . 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (VUKKEM RAMBABU) SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM.