Mr.Gaffoor Sajjid Pasha , Bangalore V. The Income Tax Officer Ward-6(2)(2), Bangalore

ITA 40/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5539 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 05-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR SHANKAR PRASAD K JDIT
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH SMC-A, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNANT MEMBER ITA NO.40 (BANG) 2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012 13) MR. GAFFOOR SAJJID PASHA, M/S M. K. ENTERPRISES, #18/A, 80 FEET ROAD, HMT LAYOUT, R. T. NAGAR, BANGALORE 560032. PAN: AJCPP0570B APPELLANT VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6 (2)(2), BANGALORE. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NARENDRA SHARMA, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : DR. SHANKAR PRASAD .K, JDIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 20-02-2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23-02-2018 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M.: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS DIR ECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (A) 7 BANGALORE DATED 07.11.2017 FOR A. Y. 2012 13. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS 6 GROUNDS. AS PER GROUND NO. 2, THIS IS THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE CIT (A) WAS IN ERROR IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL ON THE TECHNICAL GROUND OF NOT FILING THE AP PEAL IN TIME AND WITHOUT CONDONING THE DELAY OF 156 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEA L BEFORE HIM. 3. LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IN PAR A 4.0 OF HIS ORDER, LEARNED CIT (A) HAS REPRODUCED THE CONTENTS OF THE ASSESSEE S APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. HE POINTED OUT THAT IN PARA 4 OF THE SAID APPLICATION, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT SOON AFTER THE R ECEIPT OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, IT WAS PLACED BEFORE SRI S. K. NATRAJ, INCOM E TAX PRACTIONER, WHO IS ALSO ITA NO. 40(BANG)2018 2 AUDITOR OF THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO HIS TAX CONSULTANT AND BECAUSE OF HIS PROFESSIONAL PREOCCUPATION, THE MATTER ESCAPED HIS ATTENTION AND LATER WHEN NOTICE WAS ISSUED BY THE AO U/S 271 (1) (C), THE MA TTER WAS AGAIN PLACED BEFORE SRI S. K. NATRAJ, INCOME TAX PRACTIONER, THE LAPSE OF NOT FILING APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS NOTICED BY HIM AND HE INFORMED THE ASSESSEE THAT BECAUSE OF HIS PROFESSIONAL PREOCCUPA TION, THE MATTER OF ADVISING THE ASSESSEE ABOUT FILING OF APPEAL WITHIN DUE DATE ESCAPED HIS ATTENTION AND THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE APPROACHED SMT. VEENA D S, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT FOR FURTHER ADVICE AND ON HER ADVICE, THE APPEAL WAS FI LED WITH APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. HE SUBMITTED THAT LEARNED CIT (A) AS PER PARA 4.6 OF HIS ORDER DID NOT CONDONE THE DELAY BY SAYING THAT THE REASONS EXPLAINED FOR DELAY ARE NOT JUSTIFIABLE. HE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE INTER EST OF JUSTICE AND IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, THE SAID DELAY SHOULD BE CONDONED AND THE MATTER BE RESTORED TO CIT (A) FOR DECISION ON MERIT. LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT (A). 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I FEEL THAT THE DELAY OF 1 56 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE CIT (A) SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONDONED BY CIT (A). I CON DONE THE SAME AND I RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO CIT (A) FOR A DECISION O N MERIT AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH SIDES. IN VIEW OF THIS DECISION, MATTER ON MERIT DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY ADJUDICATION AT THE PRESENT STAGE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- (A.K. GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE: D A T E D : 23.02.2018 /MS/ ITA NO. 40(BANG)2018 3 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT(A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.