Mr.P. Narasimha Reddy, R.R.Dist V. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Hyderabad

ITA 503/HYD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2413 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 11 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 15-03-2018
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 28-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K SRINIVASA REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: P MURALIKRISHNA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Bonafide belief; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. NOS. 503 & 504/HYD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2006 - 07 & 2007 - 08 MR. P. NARASIMHA REDDY, D.NO. 1 - 106/3, STREET NO.2, BHAVANI NAGAR, NACHARAM, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT. PAN: ADYPP 7532 K VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA. NOS. 505 & 506/HYD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2006 - 07 & 2007 - 08 M/S. RATNA HOUSING AND ESTATE PVT LTD., D.NO.1 - 106/3, STREET NO.2, BHAVANI NAGAR, NACHARAM, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT. PAN: AAACR 2683 R VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE: SHRI P. MURALI KRISHNA FOR REVENUE : SHRI K. SRINIVASA REDDY, DR DATE OF HEARING : 15.03.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 .03.2018 ORDER PER BENCH: THESE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER S PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) - I, HYDERABAD AND IN THE CASE OF BOTH THE ASSESSEES, LD. CIT(A) REJECTED THE ADMISSION OF THE APPEAL S ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN U/S 249(4)(A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 I.E., SELF - ASSESSMENT TAX WAS NOT PAID. 2 2. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SHRI P. MURALI KRISHNA, SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO PAUCITY OF FUNDS THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT MAKE PAYMENT OF SELF - ASSESSMENT TAX; BUT NOW B OTH THE ASSESSEES HAVE PAID THE SELF - ASSESSMENT TAX AND THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, THE ASSESSEES SHOULD BE GIVEN A FRESH OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND THE MATTER S DESERVE TO BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A). 3. AT THE OUTSET, IT MAY BE NOTICED THAT THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES ARE BARRED BY LIMITATION. BOTH THE PARTIES FILED AFFIDAVITS ALONG WITH THE PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY WHEREIN IT WAS STATED THAT SHRI PISARLA NARASIMHA REDDY WAS ENGAGED IN MI LK DISTRIBUTION BUSINESS, AS A PROPRIETARY CONCERN, AND OVER A PERIOD OF TIME HE DEVELOPED CONTACTS WITH THE LOCAL FARMERS AND PEOPLE CONCERNED ENCOURAGED HIM TO ACT AS A MIDDLEMEN IN REAL ESTATE BUSINESS AND ACCORDINGLY HE ENTERED INTO SUCH BUSINESS IN THE YEAR 2001/2002 WITHOUT MUCH CAPITAL. A SEARCH WAS CARRIED ON 15.02.2006 AT RATNA HOUSING AND ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED OF WHICH HE WAS THE MANAGING DIRECTOR. CONSEQUENTLY ALL HIS PROPERTIES WERE ATTACHED WHICH MADE HIS LIFE DIFFICULT, EVEN FOR SURV IVAL. HIS HOUSE WAS ALSO ATTACHED AND DESPITE THAT HE MADE HIS BEST EFFORTS TO PAY SELF - ASSESSMENT TAX SO AS TO PURSUE THE APPEALS. IT WAS ALSO STATED THAT HE WAS NOT WELL VERSED WITH THE TAX MATTERS AND HE ENGAGED A CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT M/S. P.R. DATLA & COMPANY. THE ASSESSEE WAS UNDER BONAFIDE BELIEF THAT THEIR CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WOULD TAKE NECESSARY STEPS TO FILE THE APPEALS ON TIME AND THUS THERE WAS NO WILFUL DEFAULT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEES IN FILING THE APPEAL BELATEDLY. 4. LEARNED DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NOT RAISED A SERIOUS OBJECTION IN THIS REGARD. WE, THEREFORE, CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS. 3 5. ON MERITS, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT SELF - ASSESSMENT TAX HAVING BEEN PAID NOW, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTEST THE ISSUES ON MERITS AND REQUESTED FOR SETTING ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A). IN THIS REGARD HE PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE DECISION OF THE ITAT HYDERABAD BENCH IN THE CASE OF SMT. BANU BEGUM VS. DCIT (I TA NO.2075/HYD/2011) DATED 30.04.2012 WHEREIN UNDER SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES THE MATTERS ARE REMITTED TO THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR DISPOSAL ON MERITS. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE WAS UNABLE TO PLACE ANY CONTRARY DECISION ON THIS POINT. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION CITED (SUPRA), WE ADMIT THE APPEALS AND SET - ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A), WHO IS DIRECTED TO RE - CONSIDER THE APPEALS ON MERITS IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE SELF - ASSESSMENT TAX H AS BEEN PAID. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/ - SD/ - (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (D. MANMOHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT HYDERABAD, DATED: 21 ST MARCH , 20 18. OKK, SR.PS COPY TO 1. MR. P. NARASIMHA REDDY, D.NO.1 - 106/3, STREET NO.2, BHAVANI NAGAR, NACHARAM, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT. 2. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, HYDERABAD. 3. CIT (A) - HYDERABAD. 4. ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE - 1, HYDERABAD. 5. DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE