Greenwood Govt.Officers Welfare Sociiiety, Noida V. ACIT,Circle-54(1), New Delhi

ITA 4900/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0086 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 01-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L ANURAGI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Condonation of delay; Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH SMC : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 4900/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 GREENWOOD GOVT. OFFICERS WELFARE VS. ACIT, CIR 54(1 ), SOCIETY, NEW DELHI PLOT NO. 10, POCKET P-2, SECTOR OMEGA-1, GREATER NOIDA, DISTT. GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR UTTAR PRADESH-201306 (PAN: AAATG2745C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. ASHWANI KUMAR, CA REVENUE BY : SH. SL ANURAGI, SR. DR. ORDER THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDE R DATED 09.12.2016 OF THE LD. CIT(A)-18, NEW DELHI PERTAINI NG TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. IT IS NOTED THAT THERE IS DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL AND IN THIS REGARD, ASSESSEES COUNSEL HAS FILED A N APPLICATION DATED 05.02.2018 FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY ALONGWITH THE A FFIDAVIT OF MRS. SONALI KUMAR, SECRETARY OF THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY, ME NTIONING THEREIN THE REASONS FOR NON-FILING OF APPEAL IN TIME AND RE QUESTED TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN DISPUTE. LD. DR DID NOT CONTROVERT TH E CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD. AFTER P ERUSING THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY AND AFFIDAVIT OF THE ASSESSEE, I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THERE ARE PLAUSIBLE REASONS FOR 2 CONDONING THE DELAY IN DISPUTE, HENCE, I CONDONE TH E DELAY IN DISPUTE. 2. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AR E NOT DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, HENCE, THE SAME ARE NOT REPEAT ED HERE FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE STATED THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE NOT PROPERLY CONSIDERED THE DOCUMENTS / EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDED THE ISS UES AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND DID NOT PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNIT Y TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CASE BEFORE THEM. HE FURTHER SUB MITTED THAT THE DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE FILED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORI TIES WERE VERY ESSENTIAL IN CONSIDERING THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE. H E FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE MAY BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO SUB STANTIATE ITS CASE BEFORE THE AO BY SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUES IN D ISPUTE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH, AFTER GIVING A DEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND AFTER CONSIDERING TH E EVIDENCES / DOCUMENTS TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS FURT HER REQUESTED THAT ASSESSEE MAY ALSO BE ALLOWED TO FILE ANY EVIDENCE/D OCUMENTS BEFORE THE AO TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CASE. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE CONTENTION RAIS ED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RE CORDS ESPECIALLY THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. I FIND CONSIDERABLE 3 COGENCY IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEES COUNSE L THAT AO HAS NOT PROPERLY CONSIDERED THE DOCUMENTS / EVIDENCES FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDED THE ISSUES AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND DID NOT PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CASE BEFOR E HIM. HOWEVER, THE DOCUMENTS / EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEF ORE THE AO ARE VERY ESSENTIAL IN CONSIDERING THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE . HENCE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I SET ASIDE THE ISSUES IN DISP UTE TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH THE DIRECTIONS TO DECIDE THE SAME, AFRESH, AS PER LAW, AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE A SSESSEE AND PASS A SPEAKING ORDER, AFTER CONSIDERING ALL THE DOCUMEN TS / EVIDENCES TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO. ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FULLY COOPERATE WITH THE AO IN THE PROCEEDINGS AND DID NOT TAKE NAY UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT AND FILE ALL THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS / EVIDENCES TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CASE. 6. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 01-04-2019. SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED :01-04-2019 SR BHATANGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A), NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.