P.K. Industries, Chandigarh V. Addl. CIT, Chandigarh

ITA 533/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 53321514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 10-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAI SHREE SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: A K SOOD
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MEHAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.533 /CHD/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08) M/S P.K. INDUSTRIES, VS. THE ADDL.CIT, 3162, SECTOR 21-D, RANGE III, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN: AACFP6335K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.K.SOOD RESPONDENT BY : SMT. JAISHREE SHARMA, DR DATE OF HEARING : 09.07.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.07.2012 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J.M. : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER O F THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), CHANDIGARH DA TED 01.02.2012 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 AGAINST THE ORD ER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: 1. THAT THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (APPEALS) ARE CONTRARY TO LAW AND THE FACTS OF THE APES CASE BY N OT CONDONING THE DELAY OF 3 DAYS U/S 249(3) IN FILING OF APPEAL LATE. 2. FOR THESE AND OTHER REASONS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE APPELLANT PRAYS FOR RELIEF. 3. THE PRESENT APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEALS) IN NOT CONDONING DELAY OF 3 DAYS IN F ILING THE APPEAL BEFORE IT. THE REGISTRY HAD ISSUED A DEFECT MEMO T O THE ASSESSEE FOR THE 2 TRIBUNAL FEE BEING SHORT BY RS.9500/-. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESE NT APPEAL WAS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (APPEALS) IN NOT CONDONING THE DEL AY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE IT AND NO ISSUE WAS RAISED ON THE MER ITS OF THE CASE AS THE SAID GROUNDS OF APPEAL AGAINST THE MERITS OF THE AD DITION WERE NOT ADJUDICATED BY THE CIT (APPEALS). 4. WE FIND THAT THE PRESENT ISSUE IN RELATION TO TH E QUANTUM OF TRIBUNAL FEE STANDS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN RAJAKAMAL POLYMERS P. LTD. VS. CIT [2 91 ITR 314 (KAR)] WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED APPEALS AGAINST THE DI SMISSAL OF APPEALS BY CIT (APPEALS) FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS BEFOR E IT AND THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID TRIBUNAL FEE OF RS.500/- CHALLENGING ONLY THE DISMISSAL IN LIMINE. IN VIEW THEREOF, THE TRIBUNAL FEE PAYABLE IN THE CASE BEING RS.500/-, NO DEFAULT IN THIS REGARD IS THUS ATTRIBU TABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS A GAINST THE NON- CONDONATION OF DELAY OF ONLY THREE DAYS IN FILING T HE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS). THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 18.12.2009 BUT BY AN INADVERTENT ERROR THE RECEIPT OF ORDER WAS MENTIONED AS 21.12.2009 IN ITS RECORDS AND THE APPEAL WAS FILED ON 20.1.2010. THE SAID REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH THE CIT (APPEALS) AND CONSEQUENTLY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. WE FIND MERIT IN THE REASONS A DVANCED BY THE ASSESSEE IN JUSTIFYING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPE AL BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS). IN THE ENTIRETY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUM STANCES OF THE CASE WE CONDONE THE DELAY OF THREE DAYS IN THIS REGARD AND DIRECT THE CIT (APPEALS) TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON THE MERITS OF THE ADDITION MADE IN THE CASE. REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING SHALL BE A FFORDED TO THE 3 ASSESSEE BY THE CIT (APPEALS). THUS GROUND OF APPE AL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY OF 1 3 TH JULY, 2012. SD/ SD/- (MEHAR SINGH) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 13 TH JULY, 2012 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH