EDGAR FRANCIS THOMOS, JAIPUR V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

ITA 384/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7827 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 19-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K C GUPTA
• Keywords: Salary income; Opportunity of being heard; Condonation of delay
• Section: 72

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,A JAIPUR JH LAANHI XKSLKBZ] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SING H YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 384/JP/2019 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 SHRI EDGAR FRANCIS THOMOS 208-209,VENKATSHWAR TOWER CENTRAL SPINE,VIDHYADHAR NAGAR, JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE ACIT CIRCLE - 4 JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AECPT 7955 H VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ANIL SHARMA, CA JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY: SHRI K.C. GUPTA, (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 15/01/2020 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23 /01/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A GAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), AJMER DATED 28.01.2019 FOR THE ASSESSME NT YEAR 2014-15 RAISING THEREIN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 1. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT CONDONING THE DELAY OF 85 D AYS IN FILING OF THE APPEAL AND IN DISMISSING THE SAME AS NOT ADMITTED. ITA NO. 384/JP/2019 SHRI EGAR FRANCIS THOMOS VS ACIT, CIRCLE -, 4, JAIP UR 2 2 UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE AO IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS. 58,5 0,954/- TO RETURNED INCOME TOWARDS ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED INCOME FROM SALARY. 2.1 BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE H AD FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE ASSE SSMENT PASSED U/S 144/143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. HOWEVER, THERE WA S DELAY OF APPROXIMATELY THREE MONTHS IN FILING THE SAME. THE LD. CIT(A) REJECTED THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR SEEKING T HE CONDONATION OF DELAY AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE. 2.2 BEFORE US, THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SAME ARGUMENTS AS WERE RAISED BY HIM BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND SUB MITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A SENIOR CITIZEN OF AROUND 72 YEARS OF AGE AND THE ASSESSEE WAS SUFFERING FROM HEART DISEASE AND BECAUSE OF THA T THE ASSESSEE WAS ADMITTED IN THE HOSPITAL AT KOCHI, KERALA FOR HIS H EART SURGERY. THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT BECAUSE OF THIS REASON THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING. HENCE THE AO PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 144/143(3) OF THE ACT. THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT BECAUSE OF ILL-HEALTH, THE A SSESSEE COULD NOT VISIT THE OFFICE OF THE A.R. DURING THE MONTH OF JANUARY 2017 TO MARCH 2017 ITA NO. 384/JP/2019 SHRI EGAR FRANCIS THOMOS VS ACIT, CIRCLE -, 4, JAIP UR 3 AND BECAUSE OF THIS REASON THERE WAS DELAY IN FILIN G THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSES SEE HAD SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE LIMITATION PER IOD. 2.3 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE RELIED ON THE ORDER PASS ED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 2.4 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AS WELL AS THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). FROM THE RECORDS, WE NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PLACE D ON RECORD THE MEDICAL TREATMENT AND HOSPITALIZATION RECORD IN SUPPORT OF HIS APPLICATION FOR SEEKING THE CONDONATION OF DELAY BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). AFTER PERUSAL OF THAT RECORDS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT TH E ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED FROM SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN TIME BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THEREFORE, KEEPING IN VIEW T HE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CO LLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION VS. MST. KATIJI AND OTHERS, 167 ITR 471 (SC ), WE CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AN D WHILE SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), RESTORE BACK THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR PASSING THE AFRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER BY PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESS EE AS THE EARLIER WAS PASSED U/S 144/143(3) OF THE ACT . THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO SUBMIT ITA NO. 384/JP/2019 SHRI EGAR FRANCIS THOMOS VS ACIT, CIRCLE -, 4, JAIP UR 4 THE CONCERNED PAPERS BEFORE THE AO FOR FINALIZING T HE DE NOVO ASSESSMENT. SINCE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS RES TORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR AFRESH ADJUDICATION, THEREFORE, THE GROU ND NO 2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY ADJUDICATION BY US. T HUS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES WITH NO ORDER AS TO COST. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23/01/2020 . SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO LANHI XKSLKBZ (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 23/01/2020. *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI EDGAR FRANCIS THOMOS, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT-THE ACIT, CIRCLE 4, JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 4. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR . 5. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 384/JP/2019} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSTT. REGISTRAR