SHRI AJAY KUMAR JAIN, AJMER V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), GHAZIABAD

ITA 52/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3452 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 15-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANMOHAN KANDPAL ACIT
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Reasonable cause; Time period of passing order; TDS
• Section: 234E

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S,B JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA. NO. 52 TO 55/JP/2019 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 AJAY KUMAR JAIN 23/146, MAHAVIR MARG, KESARGANG, AJMER. CUKE VS. THE ACIT, CPC(TDS), GHAZIABAD. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AANPJ 8127 A VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE (WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI MANMOHAN KANDPAL (ACIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 27/11/2019 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27/11/2019 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THESE ARE FOUR APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAIN ST THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF LD. CIT(A), AJMER DATED 11.05.2017 FOR THE ASSES SMENT YEARS 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENG ED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR NOT ADMITTING THE APPEAL FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE AND SUSTAINING THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO U/S 234E OF THE ACT. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS NOTED THAT THERE IS DELAY I N FILING THESE APPEALS BY 546 DAYS. FROM THE RECORDS, IT IS NOTED THAT TH E DATE OF COMMUNICATION OF THE COMMISSIONERS ORDER HAS BEEN STATED AS ON 1 9.5.2017 BY THE ITA NO. 52 TO 55/JP/2019 AJAY KUMAR JAIN VS. ACIT CPC(TDS) 2 ASSESSEE IN HIS REVISED FORM 36 AND THE APPEAL HAS BEEN PRESENTED BY POST BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 15.01.2019. 3. IN HIS CONDONATION APPLICATION DATED 03.01.2019, THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT DUE TO HEALTH PROBLEMS, THE APPEAL COUL D NOT BE FILED IN TIME AND THEREFORE, THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS MAY BE CONDONED. 4. THE LD. DR IS HEARD WHO HAS OBJECTED TO THE COND ONAATION APPLICATION GIVEN THE INORDINATE DELAY OF 546 DAYS WHICH HAS HAPPENED IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT EVEN BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEAL WITH CONSIDERABLE DELAY BEYOND THE LIMITATION PERIOD AND ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED AND NOT ADMITTED BY T HE LD. CIT(A). IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT NO REASONABLE CAUSE HAS BEEN SUBMITT ED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE DELAY IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL. HENCE, THE CONDONATION APPLICATION MAY BE REJECTED AND THE APPEAL SHOULD B E DISMISSED SUMMARILY AS BARRED BY LIMITATION. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THERE IS DELAY OF 546 DAYS IN FILING THE PRESENT SET OF FOUR APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN HIS CONDONATION APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT DUE TO HI S HEALTH PROBLEM, THE APPEAL COULD NOT BE FILED IN TIME. HOWEVER, THERE I S NOTHING ON RECORD IN SUPPORT OF THE PRAYER SO TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN T ERMS OF HIS HEALTH PROBLEM EITHER IN THE FORM OF ANY MEDICAL REPORTS F ROM THE REGISTERED MEDICAL PRACTITIONER OR FROM ANY RECOGNIZED HOSPITA L. THE ASSESSEE HAS MERELY FILED A ONE LINER APPLICATION ON A PLAIN PAP ER AND NOT EVEN AN ITA NO. 52 TO 55/JP/2019 AJAY KUMAR JAIN VS. ACIT CPC(TDS) 3 AFFIDAVIT HAS BEEN FILED IN SUPPORT OF HIS PRAYER. THEREFORE, MERELY BASIS ONE LINE APPLICATION SO FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY MEDICAL REPORT OR AN AFFIDAVIT AND THUS REMAIN UNSU BSTANTIATED, WE ARE UNABLE TO ACCEDE TO THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONING THE DELAY. THE DELAY CANNOT BE CONDONED MERELY BECAUSE THE ASS ESSEE'S CASE CALLS FOR SYMPATHY OR MERELY OUT OF BENEVOLENCE. FOR THE EXERCISE OF DISCRETION IN CONDONING THE DELAY, IT MUST BE ESTABLISHED BEYO ND THE SHADOW OF DOUBT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS DILIGENT AND WAS NOT GU ILTY OF NEGLIGENCE ON ITS PART. IT IS NOT A MATTER OF DELAY OF FEW DAYS R ATHER THE DELAY HAS HAPPENED FOR 546 DAYS. THEREFORE, IT IS INCUMBENT ON PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO COME FORWARD AND EXPLAIN THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH PREVENTED HIM FROM FILING THE APPEAL IN TIME. IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT T HERE IS CONSISTENT FAILURE ON PART OF THE ASSESSEE AS APPARENT FROM THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) WHO HAS ALSO REJECTED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE INORDINATE DELAY. THEREFORE, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THERE IS CLEARLY A FAILURE ON PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN ATTENDING TO THE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS AND LACK OF DI LIGENCE AND INACTION ON HIS PART WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED BY THE ASSES SEE IF IT HAD EXERCISED DUE CARE AND ATTENTION. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPE ALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED AS BARRED BY LIMITATION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27/11/2019. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 27/11/2019. ITA NO. 52 TO 55/JP/2019 AJAY KUMAR JAIN VS. ACIT CPC(TDS) 4 *SANTOSH VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- AJAY KUMAR JAIN, AJMER. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- ACIT, CPC(TDS), GHAZIABAD. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE { ITA NO. 52 TO 55/JP/2019} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR