Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
40023714 RSA 2014
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
1 month(s) 25 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
15-07-2014
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
B
Assessment Year
2009-2010
Appeal Filed On
20-05-2014
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI S UNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 400/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 10 INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES (INDIA) LTD. 187/170, JAJMAU KANPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER 6 (1) KANPUR PAN: AABCJ3864L (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP ELL ANT BY: SHRI. ABHINAV MEHROTRA, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. Y. P. SRIVASTAV, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 09 0 7 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 15 0 7 2014 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), INTER ALIA, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - 1 . THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF T H E ASSE SSEE, WIT HOUT CONSIDERING THE TRUE AND CORRECT FACTS OF THE CASE. 2 . THAT THE LD. C1T(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN MUTUALLY A) DECIDING THE APPEAL ON MERITS AND B) NOT ADMITTING IT FOR DECISION AS EVIDENT FROM PARAGRAPH 3 AND 4 OF THE ORDER OF CIT(A)AND H AS PASSED A CRYPTIC, NON - SPEAKING AND RATHER SELF - CONTRADICTORY ORDER. 3 . THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE DELAY IN PREFERRING THE APPEAL WAS ON PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 2 - : ACCOUNT OF ILLNESS OF THE ERSTWHILE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE AND THAT THE APPEAL WAS DELAYED BY SMALL NUMBER OF DAYS, THAT DESERVED TO BE CONDONED. 4 . THAT THE LD. C1T(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN OMITTING TO DECIDE ISSUES IN APPEAL WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE TRUE AND CORRECT FACTS INVOLVED AND BY APPROVING THE AC TION OF THE AO, THROUGH A NON - SPEAKING ORDER AND CRYPTIC ORDER. 5 . THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ADEQUATELY DEMONSTRATED THAT THERE WAS NO MALAFIED IN NOT PREFERRING THE APPEAL WITHIN TIME AND THAT THE SAME GOT INCAPACITATED DUE TO THE ILLNESS OF THE COUNSEL, WHICH IS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ASSESSEE . 6 . THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN NOT ADMITTING THE APPEAL IGNORING THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION, ANANTNAG V. MST.KATIJI (1987) 2 SCC 107 AND STATE OF NAGALAND V. LIPOK A O( 2005) 3 SCC 752 . 7 . THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN NOT ADDRESSING AND LEGALLY DECIDING THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN VIEW OF BINDING JUDI CIAL DECISIONS THAT WERE VERY MUCH APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS INVOLVED IN THE MATTER AND WERE PROMPTLY CITED BY THE LD. AR BEFORE THE AUTHORITY. 8 . THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS, LAW AND IS IN QUARREL WITH PRINCIPAL OF NATURAL JUST ICE AND HENCE DESERVES TO BE SET - ASIDE. 2 . THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEAL, BUT THEY ALL RELATE TO THE DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL SUMMARILY BY THE LD. CIT(A) BY HOLDING THAT THE APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 3 - : INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITH THE CONTENTION THAT THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WAS DELAYED BY 67 DAYS AND THE REASON FOR DELAY WAS STATED TO BE I LLNESS OF THE COUNSEL. IN SUPPORT OF ILLNESS OF THE COUNSEL , MEDICAL CERTIFICATE WAS FILED, IN WHICH IT WAS STATED THAT THE COUNSEL WAS SUFFERING FROM VIRAL HEPATITIS. THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT CONVINCED WITH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND REJECTED THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. THEREAFTER HE DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL WAS NOT WITHIN THE CONTROL OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE COUNSEL , WHO WAS ENTRUSTED FOR FILING OF THE APPEAL , WAS ILL AND THIS FACT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE LD. CIT(A) SYMPATHETICALLY. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) BE CONDONED AND THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO HIS FILE FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT. 3 . THE LD. D.R. HAS PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 4 . HAVING GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND FROM A CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW , WE FIND TH AT THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL HAS BEEN DULY EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE CONDONED THE DELAY AND ADJUDICATED THE APPEAL ON MERIT. BUT THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT CONDONE THE DELAY AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL BEING BARRED BY TIME. ON THE ISSUE OF CONDONATION OF DELAY, IT HAS BEEN REPEATEDLY HELD BY THE HON'BLE APEX COURT AND DIFFERENT HIGH COURTS THAT SYMPATHETIC VIEW SHOULD BE TAKEN WHILE ADJUDICATING THE APPLICA TION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. ORDINARILY THE DELAY SHOULD BE CONDONED , THOUGH THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN THE DELAY OF EACH DAY. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED VALID REASON FOR DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL, THE SAME SHOULD HAVE BE EN CONDONED BY THE LD. CIT(A). WE, THEREFORE, D O NOT AGREE WITH THE LD. CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD. ACCORDINGLY WE CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 4 - : LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUES ON MERIT BY PASSING A REASONED ORDER. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DI RECTED TO EXTEND ALL SORT OF CO - OPERATION TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND TO PUT ITS APPEARANCE AS AND WHEN DESIRED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15.7.2014. SD/ - SD/ - [ A. K. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 15 TH JU LY , 2014 JJ: 0907 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ )
