IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE C BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NO.483(B)/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04) M/S YASHODHA S. SHETTY, W/O SHRI SHARATHKUMAR SHETTY, BELLADI, SENAPURA, KUNDAPUR TQ. PAN NO.AVOPS4282R A PPELLANT VS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MANGALORE. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M. RAGHAVENDRA MAIYA, CA REVENUE BY : SMT. SUSAN THOMAS JOSE, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 04-06-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04-06-2012 O R D E R PER SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17-01-2011 OF CIT(A), MYSORE (ADDITIONAL CHARGE MA NGALORE) RELATING TO AY : 03-04. ITA NO.483(B)/2011 2 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL. HE DERIVES INCOME FROM CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF TRAVEL AGENCY BESIDES R EAL ESTATE AGENCY. FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04, THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.58,169/- BES IDES AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.2,79,652/-. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THEREFOR E THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE AO U/S.144 OF THE A CT, TO THE BEST OF HIS JUDGMENT. IN THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT, THE AO HELD THAT THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESS EE AT RS.2,79,652/- COULD BE ACCEPTED ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.66,065/- AND THE REMAINING SUM HAS TO BE TREATED AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM OTHER SOURCES. ACCORDINGLY, A SUM OF RS.2,13,045/- WAS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 2.1 AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESS EE FILED APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A). THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT WAS PASSED ON 28-02-2006 AND WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE ON 15-3-2 006. THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A) ONLY ON 19-5-20 06. THERE WAS THEREFORE, A DELAY OF 45 DAYS IN FILING THE APP EAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE FILED COPY OF THE MEDICAL CER TIFICATE BEFORE THE CIT(A), BUT DID NOT FILE AN APPLICATION FOR CON DONING THE DELAY ITA NO.483(B)/2011 3 IN FILING THE APPEAL. THE CIT(A) FOUND THAT THERE W AS NO APPLICATION FOR CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE A PPEAL. HE ALSO FOUND THAT THERE WAS NOTHING IN THE STATEM ENT OF FACTS REGARDING CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING OF T HE APPEAL. HE THEREFORE, DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HOL DING THAT THERE WAS NO REASONABLE CAUSE FOR FILING OF THIS AP PEAL BELATEDLY. NEVERTHELESS, THE CIT(A) PROCEEDED TO ADJUDICATE TH E APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS AS WELL. THE CIT(A) FOUND THAT IN AY: 2002-03 IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN THE ASSESSMEN T COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE IT ACT, 19561, THE AO ACCEPTED TH E AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.2,05,110/- AS AGAINST THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME AT RS.2,70,880/ -. THE CIT(A) FOUND THAT THE FACTS PREVAILING IN THE ASSESSMENT Y EARS 2002-03 & 2003-04 WERE IDENTICAL. HE ALSO FOUND THAT THE BA SIS OF ESTIMATION OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN ASSESSMENT YEA R : 2002-03 AT RS.2,05,110/- WAS REASONABLE. HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEES AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN THE PRESENT ASSES SMENT YEAR HAS TO BE ESTIMATED AT RS.2,25,000/-. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WAS REDUCED BY RS.1,53,390/-. THE CIT(A) HOWEVER, OBSERVED THAT THE RELIEF GIVEN O THE ASSES SEE WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE DECISION OF THE HIGHER FORUM ON THE CONDITION OF ITA NO.483(B)/2011 4 DELAY IN FILLING THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A). AGGRIEVED, BY THE AFORESAID DECISION, OF THE CIT(A) , REGARDING CONDONATION OF DELAY INFILLING APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. PERUSAL OF THE CIT(A)S ORDER SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEEE HAD FILED M EDICAL CERTIFICATE EXPLAINING THE REASON FOR FILING THE AP PEAL BELATEDLY, AS OWING TO THE ILL HEALTH OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS A FA CT, THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED A SPECIFIC APPLICATION FOR T HE CONDONATION OF DELAY. 4. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF WRITT EN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IS ONLY A TECH NICAL LAPSE. IF THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY HER ILLNESS FROM FILI NG THE APPEAL WITHIN TIME, THEN THE DELAY HAS TO BE CONDONED. WE ARE OF THE VIEW, THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THE ISSUE OF CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) SHO ULD BE SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER REMITTED TO THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH CON SIDERATION. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FILE A WRITTEN APPLICAT ION BEFORE THE CIT(A), EXPLAINING THE DELAY IN FILLING OF THE APPE AL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) WILL CONSIDER THE SAME AND DECI DE THE ITA NO.483(B)/2011 5 QUESTION OF CONDONATION OF DELAY ON MERITS. WE DIR ECT AND ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 4 TH JUNE, 2012. SD/- SD/- (N. BARATHVAJA SANKAR) (N.V. VASUDEVAN) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: BANGALORE DATED: 04-06-2012 AM* COPY TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE REVENUE 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR 6. GF(BLORE) 7. GF(DELHI) BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR