Nirma Limited, Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT, Centralized Processing Cell-TDS, Gaziabad

ITA 551/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0934 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 13-03-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: H C SHAH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

ITA NO . 551 //AHD/2015 A.Y. 20 09 - 10 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD A BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM : R.P. TOLANI, JM AND PRAMOD KUMAR AM ] I TA NO. 551 /AHD/201 5 ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 2009 - 10 NIRMA LIMITED, .......... .APPELLANT NIRMA HOUSE, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD 380 009. [PAN: AAACN 5350 K] VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C PC, TDS, GHAZIABAD. ... . RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: H.C. SHAH , FOR THE APPELLANT K. MADHUSUDAN , FOR THE RESPONDENT D ATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : JULY 29 TH , 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : AUGUST 10 TH , 201 6 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR , AM : BY WAY OF TH IS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 2 1 .0 1 .201 5 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN THE MATTER OF PROCESSING OF RETURN UNDER SECTION 200A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE SECOND QUARTER OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 9 - 10 . 2. GRIEVANCE OF THE AS S E SSEE IS TH A T THE LE A RNED CIT ( A ) HAS ERRED IN REJECTING APPELLANT S REQUEST FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY I N FILING APPEAL AN D IN NOT ADJUDICATING THE MAT T ER ON MERITS. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THIS GROUND, OF COURSE, THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN GROUND OF APPEAL ON MERIT BUT , FOR THE REASONS WE WILL SET OUT IN A SHORT WHILE , THERE IS NO NEED TO D E AL WITH THOSE ISSUES. ITA NO . 551 //AHD/2015 A.Y. 20 09 - 10 PAGE 2 OF 2 4. TO ADJUDICATE ON THIS APPEAL, ONLY A FEW MATERIAL FACTS NEED TO BE TAKEN NOTE OF . THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED LAT E AND THE D E LAY WAS 50 DAYS. THE LEARNED CIT ( A ), HOWEVER , DECLINED TO CONDONE THE SAME AND DISMIS S E D THE APPEAL IN LIMINE . THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED AND IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WHEN THIS APPEAL CAME UP FOR HEARING AND IN RESPONSE TO OUR SUGGESTION , LEARNED R EPRESENTATIVES FAIRLY AGREED THAT THE MAT T ER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT ( A ) FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERIT S AFTER CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL , PARTICULARLY , IN VI E W OF THE FACT THAT THE REASON FOR DELAY APPEARS TO BE BONAFIDE. 6. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY STATES THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE MATER BEING RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIA FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERIT AS SUCH. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MAT T ER AND WITH THE CONSENT OF THE PARTIES, MATTER STANDS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT(A). 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 10 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2016 . SD/ - SD/ - R.P. TOLANI PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) PBN/* DATED: T HE 10 TH AUGUST , 201 6 . COPIES TO : (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD