Demi Realtors, Hyderabad, Chennai V. Addl.CIT, Range-14, Hyderabad, Hyderabad

ITA 466/HYD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4936 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: I Y V S T SAI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; TDS
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B , HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.777/HYD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2013 - 14 HARI GOPAL REDDY PINNPU, HYDERABAD. PAN: APOPP 0606 G VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(5), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 466/HYD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011 - 12 DEMI REALTORS, HYDERABAD. PAN: AAFFD 9401 P VS. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 14, HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 1166/HYD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010 - 11 ABDUL GAFFAR KHAN, HYDERABAD. PAN: ANCPK 5526 E VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(2), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 1167/HYD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010 - 11 ASHRAFUNNISA BEGUM, HYDERABAD. VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(2), 2 AHOPB 7932 R HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 611/HYD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013 - 14 LEO LAMINATES PVT LTD., HYDERABAD. PAN: AAACL 2456 L VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 16(1), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: (I) T. CHAITANYA KUMAR (II) SHRI PHANIDRA KUMAR (III) SHRI MOHD. AFZAL (IV) SHRI K.C. DEVDAS REVENUE BY: (I) Y.V.S.T. SAI, CIT - DR DATE OF HEARING: 21/01/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 02 /0 2 /2021 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.: ALL THESE APPEAL S ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE S, AGGRIEVED BY THE RESPECTIVE ORDER S OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), HYDERABAD / PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HYDERABAD. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LD. ARS FOR THE ASSESSEES IN THE CASES OF M/S. DEMI REALTORS AND HARI GOPAL REDDY PINNPU SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS A DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL OF 27 DAYS IN ITA NO. 466/HYD/2017 AND 400 DAYS IN ITA NO.777/HYD/2019. LD. ARS 3 FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE S HA D FILED AFFIDAVITS SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY WHEREIN THE REASONS FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME LIMIT WAS EXPLAINED. FOR REFERENCE, THE RELEVANT PORTION FROM THE AFFIDAVIT IS EXTRACTED HEREIN BELOW: - SL NO ITA NO. NAME OF THE ASSESSEE DELAY IN NO. OF DAYS REASONS GIVEN FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY 1. 466/H/17 M/S. DEMI REALTORS, HYDERABAD. 27 DAYS 1. 2. .. 3. .. 4. .. 5. .. 6. NO SOONER THAN THE APPELLATE ORDER CITED ABOVE WAS RECEIVED ON 13/12/2016, I TRIED CONTACTING MY AUDITORS M/S. S.P. ASSOCIATES AT CHENNAI FOR FOLLOW UP ACTION THEREON. 7. I COULD REACH THEN ONLY SOMETIME AFTER CHRIS TMAS DURING WHICH TIME I WAS ADVISED TO SEND THE PAPERS AFTER ONE MONTH SINCE THEY WERE PREOCCUPIED WITH THE DISLOCATION ON ACCOUNT OF CYCLONE AS WELL AS WORKLOAD DUE TO DEMONETIZATION OF HIGH VALUE CURRENCY, FOR GIVING GUIDANCE TO THEIR CLIENTS. 8. HOWEVER, DUE TO FINANCIAL AND OTHER PRESSURES ON ACCOUNT OF SEVERAL INCOME TAX APPEALS RELATING TO DEMI REALTORS AND MYSELF, I HAD MISPLACED THE ORDER OF CIT (A) IN THE VOLUMINOUS PAPERS KEPT IN THE LITIGATION FILES AND COULD NOT READILY TRACE THE SAME. 9. I TRACED TH E APPELLATE ORDER IN THE FILE FOLDER RELATING MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED FOR DEMI REALTORS IN M.A NO. 3/4/2017 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 649/HYD/2013 FOR AY 2008 - 09 ON 06 TH MARCH, 2017 AND IMMEDIATELY TOOK STEPS TO SEND THEH RELEVANT PAPERS TO OUR TAX CO NSULTANT AT CHENNAI, ON THE ADVICE OF MY AUDITORS M/S. S.P. ASSOCIATES AT CHENNAI. 4 10. THE PAPERS WERE RECEIVED BY THE OFFICE OF SHRI J. PRABHAKAR, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT AT CHENNAI ON 8/3/2017 AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL GROUNDS OF APPEALS BEFORE THE HONBLE INCOME T AX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WAS MADE READY AND E - MAILED TO ME ON 9/3/2017. 11. PAID THE INSTITUTIONAL FEES OF RS. 500/ - ON 10/03/2017, SIGNED THE APPEAL PAPERS WITH A COUNTER SIGNATURE OF SHRI J. PRABHAKAR IN FORM 36, WHO VISITED HYDERABAD ON THAT DAY TO ARGUE THE M ISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AFORESAID POSTED FOR HEARING BEFORE HONBLE A BENCH THERE AT. 12. FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ON 10/03/2017. 13. THERE IS A DELAY OF 27 DAYS ON ACCOUNT OF THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCES, WHICH OCCURRED DUE TO OVERSIG HT AND MENTAL PRESSURE ON ACCOUNT OF HUGE DEMAND OF RS. 100 CRS PENDING ADJUDICATION IN THE CASES OF THE APPELLANT AND MY PERSONAL ASSESSMENTS. 14. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT IS HUMBLY REQUESTED THAT NO CONTUMACIOUS CONDUCT BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE DELAY AFORESAID A ND THE DELAY OF 27 DAYS BE CONDONED AND APPEAL BE TAKEN UP FOR DISPOSAL ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 2. 777/H/19 HARI GOPAL REDDY PINNU 400 DAYS 1. .WHEN THE APPEAL WAS PENDING BEFORE LD CIT (A), THE PR. CIT - 1, BY VIRTUE OF THE POWERS VESTED IN HIM PASSED AN ORDER U/S. 263 OF THE IT ACT ON 9 TH FEBRUARY DIRECTING THE AO TO RE - DO THE ASSESSMENT, AND THE SAME IS PENDING BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). 2. WHEN THE SAME WAS DISCUSSED WITH AN ADVOCATE, HE ADVISED THAT AN APPEAL LIES AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE PR. CIT U/S. 263 OF THE IT ACT. THEREFORE, THE PETITIONER IS FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE ITAT. THERE IS A DELAY OF 400 DAYS AND THE PETITIONER HUMBLY SUBMITS THAT HE WAS UNDER THE BONAFIDE 5 BELIEF THAT NO APPEAL NEED BE FILED CONTESTING THE ORDER U/S. 263 OF THE IT ACT. THE PETITIONER HUMBLY SUBMITS THAT THE DELAY IS FOR THE REASONS SUBMITTED ABOVE AND IS NOT INTENTIONAL. THE PETI TIONER, THEREFORE, PRAYS THE HONBLE ITAT TO KINDLY CONDONE THE DELAY AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS IN THE MATTER. ON PERUSAL OF THE AFFIDAVITS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL OF 27 DAYS AND 400 DAYS IN THE CASES OF M/S. DEMI REALTORS AND HARI GOPAL REDDY PINNPU RESPECTIVELY , WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REASONS STATED HEREIN ABOVE ARE JUSTIFIABLE AND SATISFACTORY IN ORDER TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN BOTH THE CASES . THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST O F JUSTICE, WE HEREBY CONDONE THE DELAY OF 27 DAYS AND 400 DAYS IN THE CASES OF M/S. DEMI REALTORS AND HARI GOPAL REDDY PINNPU RESPECTIVELY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND PROCEED TO HEAR THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 2. ALL THE ABOVE MENTIONED ASSESSEES HAVE FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BEFORE US SEEKING WITHDRAWAL OF THEIR APPEALS AS THE Y HAVE OPTED TO AVAIL VIVAD SE VISWAS SCHEME. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE S HAVE FILED FORM NO.1 & 2 IN ALL THESE CASES AND ALSO RECEIVED FORM - 3 FROM THE REVENUE IN CERTAIN CASES . HENCE, IT IS PRAYED IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS THAT THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE S MAY BE ALLOWED TO BE WITHDRAWN AND DISMISSED AS SUCH. 6 3. THE LD. DR CONCEDED TO THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEES AND T HEIR COUNSELS. 4. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, W E ARE INCLINED TO ALLO W THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE S TO BE WITHDRAWN YIELDING TO THE PRAYER OF THE LD. A RS AS THE ASSESSEES HAVE PREFERRED TO AVAIL THE VIVAD - SE - VISHWAS SCHEME BY F ILING FORM NO.1, 2 IN ALL THE INSTANT CASES AND IN SOME CASES THE ASSESSEES HAVE ALSO RECEIVED FORM NO - 3 FROM THE REVENUE. THE LD. DR HAS ALSO CONCEDED TO THE REQUEST OF THE LD. ARS. A CCORDINGLY, WE HEREBY DISMISS THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEES AS WITHDRAW N. HOWEVER, WE ALSO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT, IF ANY OF THE ASSESSEE S CASE S ARE NOT ACCEPTED IN THE VIVAD - SE - VISWAS SCHEME BY THE REVENUE FOR WHATSOEVER MAY BE THE REASON, THEN THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSEE S SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO FILE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION S BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT PRESCRIBED UNDER THE ACT TO REINSTATE THE IR APPEAL. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE ABOVE - MENTIONED APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE S ARE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN . 7 PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE SECOND OF FEBR UARY, 2021. S D/ - S D/ - (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 02 ND FEBR UARY, 2021. OKK COPY TO: - 1. HARI GOPAL REDDY PINNAPU C/O. T. CHAITANYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE, FLAT NO.102, GOWRI APTS, URDU LANE, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD. (II) M/S. DEMI REALTORS C/O. J. PRABHAKAR, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, RESIDENCY APARTMENTS, 245, T.T.K. ROAD, ALWARPET, CHENNAI 600 018. (III) ABDUL GAFFAR KHAN C/O. MOHD. AFZAL, ADVOCATE, 11 - 5 - 465, SHERSONS RESIDENCY, FLAT NO. 402, CRIMINAL COURT ROAD, RED HILLS, HYDERABAD 500 004. (IV) ASHRAFUNNISA BEGUM C/O. MOHD. AFZAL, ADVOCATE, 11 - 5 - 465, SHERSONS RESIDENCY, FLAT NO. 402, CRIMINAL COURT ROAD, RED HILLS, HYDERABAD 500 004. (V) LEO LAMINATES PRIVATE LIMITED, SURVEY NO. 252, GANGANPAHAD, HYDERABAD. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(5), HYDERABAD, TELANGANA. (II) ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE - 14, HYDERABAD. (III) THE INCOM E TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(2), IT TOWERS, AC GUARDS, HYDERABAD. (IV) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 16(1), HYDERABAD. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 8, HYDERABAD. (II) THE CIT (A) - 1, HYDERABAD. (III) THE CIT (A) - 4, HYDERABAD. 4 . THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, HYDERABAD. (II) THE CIT (TDS), HYDERABAD. (III) THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4, HYDERABAD. 5 . DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6 . GUARD FILE.