, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.403/CHNY/2019 ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) SMT. SIVASANKARAN JAYASRI, NO.64/47, MADHAVARAM HIGH ROAD, MOOLAKADAI, CHENNAI 600 060. VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 4(2), CHENNAI. PAN: AGUPJ3123F ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI N. DEVANATHAN, ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 09.05.2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.05.2019 / O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM:- THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-5, CHENNAI, DATED 19.06.2018 IN ITA NO.381/CIT(A)-5/2017-18 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 PASSED U/S. 250(6) R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT. 2. THE APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH A DELAY OF 173 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A CONDONATION PETITION STATING THAT THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE WHO REPRESENTED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) HAD NOT INFORMED THE ASSESSEE ABOUT THE ADVERSE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD.CIT(A). 2 ITA NO.403/CHNY/2019 THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FAILED TO FILE AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WITHIN THE STIPULATED TIME AND THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AWARE ABOUT THE PROGRESS OF THE APPEAL. ONLY AFTER REALIZING ABOUT THE FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBSEQUENTLY THE ASSESSEE HAD CHANGED HER COUNSEL AND ENTRUSTED THE MATTER TO ANOTHER COUNSEL WHO FILED THE APPEAL DUE TO WHICH THE DELAY HAD OCCURRED. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT BE PENALIZED DUE TO THE FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT THE CASE DILIGENTLY. HENCE IT WAS REQUESTED THAT THE DELAY OF 173 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL MAY BE CONDONED. THE LD. DR STRONGLY OBJECTED TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. AR. AFTER HEARING BOTH SIDES, THOUGH WE DO NOT APPRECIATE THE LAPSE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE APPEAL WITHIN THE STIPULATED PERIOD, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE HEREBY CONDONE THE DELAY OF 173 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL AND PROCEED TO HEAR THE CASE ON MERITS. 3. ON PERUSING THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A), WE FIND THAT THE LD.COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPEARED BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) ALSO AND THERE WAS DELAY OF 408 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). HOWEVER THE LD.CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS BRIEFLY WITHOUT MUCH ELABORATION. THEREFORE WE HEREBY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND FURTHER KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE BEING AN INDIVIDUAL HAVING MEAGER SOURCE OF INCOME AND NOT 3 ITA NO.403/CHNY/2019 GUIDED BY PROPER COUNSELS, REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.CIT(A) WITH DIRECTIONS TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND MERIT AFTER AFFORDING THE ASSESSEE DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. AT THE SAME TIME, WE ALSO CAUTION THE ASSESSEE AND HIS COUNSEL TO CO-OPERATE BEFORE THE LD.REVENUE AUTHORITIES PROMPTLY IN ORDER TO EXPEDITE THEIR PROCEEDINGS, FAILING WHICH THE LD.REVENUE AUTHORITIES SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH MERIT AND LAW BASED ON THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 10 TH MAY, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- /CHENNAI, /DATED 10 TH MAY, 2019 RSR /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ( ) /CIT(A) 4. /CIT 5. /DR 6. [ /GF ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER