Supply Chain Consultants Pvt Ltd, Chennai V. ITO, Corp Ward 6(4), Chennai

ITA 420/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1567 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRINIRANJANI
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 264; 154

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! ' # , % #& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.420/CHNY/2019 ) *) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S SUPPLY CHAIN CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD., PLOT NO.146 & 148, SIDCO INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, THIRUMAZHISAI, POONAMALLEE TALUK, THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT, CHENNAI 602 107. PAN : AAGCS 4843 Q V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 6(4), CHENNAI - 600 034. (,-/ APPELLANT) (./,-/ RESPONDENT) ,- 0 1 / APPELLANT BY : MS. S. SRINIRANJANI, ADVOCATE ./,- 0 1 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SRIDHAR DORA, JCIT 2 0 3% / DATE OF HEARING : 03.06.2019 45* 0 3% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.06.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -16, CHENN AI, DATED 26.12.2018 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2 I.T.A. NO.420/CHNY/19 2. MS. S. SRINIRANJANI, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS A DELAY OF 100 DAYS FROM 0 3.06.2015 TO 16.10.2015 IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPE ALS). THE CIT(APPEALS) REFUSED TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND DISMI SSED THE APPEAL. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE ASSESSEE FILED MISCELLANEOUS PETITION UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INC OME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). THERE WAS A REASON FOR DELAY. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED PETITION UNDER SECTION 264 OF T HE ACT WHICH WAS WITHDRAWN SUBSEQUENTLY. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO TH E LD. COUNSEL, THE DELAY IS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ASSESSEE, HE NCE, THE DELAY MAY BE CONDONED AND THE APPEAL MAY BE DISPOSED OF O N MERIT. 3. WE HEARD SHRI SRIDHAR DORA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., TH ERE WAS NO REASONABLE CAUSE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NO T FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME. 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THE LD. D.R., THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION TH AT THE ASSESSEE WAS PROSECUTING THE MATTER BY WAY OF PETITION UNDER SECTION 154 AND 264 OF THE ACT. THE LD.COUNSEL CLAIMS THAT THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 264 OF THE ACT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY WITHD RAWN. 3 I.T.A. NO.420/CHNY/19 THEREFORE, THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT FILIN G THE APPEAL WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF TH E CONSIDERED OPINION THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS SINCERELY PROSE CUTING THE APPEAL BEFORE OTHER FORUMS, THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) WITHIN TH E PRESCRIBED TIME. THEREFORE, WHETHER THE ASSESSEE APPEARED OR NOT, TH E CIT(APPEALS) IS EXPECTED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT. HEN CE, THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) WITHIN TH E TIME PRESCRIBED IS HEREBY CONDONED. NOW, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE E STANDS RESTORE IN THE FILE OF THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(A PPEALS) IS DIRECTED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT AFTER GIVING A RE ASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 7 TH JUNE, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ' # ) ( . . . ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (N.R.S. GANESAN) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 7 /DATED, THE 7 TH JUNE, 2019. KRI. 4 I.T.A. NO.420/CHNY/19 0 .389 :9*3 /COPY TO: 1. ,- /APPELLANT 2. ./,- /RESPONDENT 3. 2 ;3 () /CIT(A)-16, CHENNAI-34 4. PRINCIPAL CIT- 6, CHENNAI-34 5. 9< .3 /DR 6. =) > /GF.