Mukesh Chand, Ghaziabad V. ITO WARD - 1(4), Ghaziabad

ITA 532/DEL/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2046 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 29-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI SMC-2 BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING ) BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.532/DEL/2020 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 MUKE SH CHAND, C/O-AKHILESH KUMAR, ADV., CH NO. 206-207, ANSAL SATYAM, DC, RAJNAGAR, GHAZIABAD-201002. PAN-ADPPC3753N VS ITO, WARD-1(4), GHAZIABAD. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SH. AKHI L ESH KUMAR, ADV. RESPONDENT BY SH. R.K.GUPTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 22.06.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30 .06.2021 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2009-10 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), GHAZI ABAD DATED 18.11.2019. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1. BECAUSE, ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) IS BAD IN LAW AND I S AGAINST THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. BECAUSE, LD.CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL IN LIMINE BY NOT CONDONING DELAY OF LITTLE OVER THREE MONTHS DU E TO ILLNESS OF ASSESSEE DULY SUPPORTED WITH MEDICAL CERTIFICATES, BY REJECT ING MEDICAL CERTIFICATE WITH TOO TECHNICAL REASON AND HENCE DISCRETION NOT EXERCISED JUDICIALLY IN FAVOUR OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE AS PER THE SETTLED LA W. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUB MITTED THAT LD.CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND OF LIMITATION. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE EXPLANA TION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE ITA NO.532/DEL/2020 2 | P A GE THAT HE WAS SUFFERING FROM MEDICAL ELEMENTS. HE FU RTHER SUBMITTED THAT LD.CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE ADOPTED A LIBERAL APPROACH UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE. 3. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT UNDE R THESE FACTS, THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING REASONABLE CAUSE FOR FILING APP EAL LATE BY 03 MONTHS [90 DAYS]. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT NO PREJUDICE WOUL D CAUSE WHETHER IT WOULD SUB-SERVE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, IF THE DELAY IS CONDONED AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE DECIDED AFRESH. 4. LD. DR OPPOSED THESE SUBMISSIONS AND SUPPORTED T HE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A). 5. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THRO UGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW T HAT LD.CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE TAKEN A LENIENT VIEW AND CONDONED THE DELAY. THE A SSESSEE HAS DEMONSTRATED A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE DELAY OF 03 MONTHS [90 D AYS]. I, THEREFORE, CONDONE THE DELAY AND RESTORE THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TO LD.C IT(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME ON MERIT. THUS, GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THI S APPEAL ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ABOVE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED ON CONCLUSION OF VIR TUAL HEARING IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES ON 30 TH JUNE, 2021. SD/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.532/DEL/2020 3 | P A GE * AMIT KUMAR * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI