M/s. Bharti (RM) Holdings Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5711/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1231 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 07-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Principle of natural justice; Condonation of delay; Set aside
• Section: 143(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: A , NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO . 5711 /DEL/ 2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015 - 16 M/S. BHARTI (RM) HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., 1, BHARTI CRESCENT, NELSON MANDELA ROAD, PHASE - II, VASANT KUNJ, NEW DELHI VS. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4(2), NEW DELHI PAN : AADCB2326A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI ANIL BHALL, FCA RESPONDENT BY SHRI MANOJ KUMAR MAHAR, SR.DR ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER DATED 01/09/2016 PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) - 35, NEW DELHI [IN SHORT THE LD. CIT(A) ] FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 16 RAISING FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1) THAT LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT ADMITTING THE APPEAL ON ACCOUNT OF DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL AND THEREBY REJ ECTING APPELLANT S APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. DATE OF HEARING 06.08.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03.09.2019 2 ITA NO . 5711/DEL/2016 2) WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT CONSIDERING THE APPELLANT COMPANY S WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED ON MERITS REGARDING EXCESS CHARGES OF INTEREST U/S 234C OF THE ACT AMOUNTING TO RS.7,46,891/ - 2. B EFORE US , LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS A DELAY OF ONE MONTH IN FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AGAINST THE ORDER PASS ED UNDER S ECTION 143(1) OF THE INCOME - TAX A CT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE A CT ) BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HOWEVER , THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT ADMIT THE APPEAL AND DISMISS ED THE SAME. THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF PROCESSIN G UNDER SECTION 143 (1) OF THE A CT W AS RECEIVED ON REGISTERED EMAIL, OF COMPANY S ACCOUNTANT , WHICH DUE TO OVERSIGHT ON HIS PART, WAS NOT DELIVERED TO THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE RESPONSIBLE FOR FILING APPEAL, HENCE THE APPEAL COULD NOT BE FILED IN TIME. HE SUBMITTED THAT IN IDENTICAL CIRCUM STANCES IN THE AN OTHER CASE OF M/S BHARTI (RBM) HOLDING PRIVATE LIMITED (PAN : AADCB 2350C) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONDONED THE DELAY AND ADMITTED APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY , HE SUBMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF THE IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE INSTANT CASE SHOULD ALSO BE DIRECTED TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR DECIDING ON MERIT. 3. THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, OBJECTED FOR CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSION OF THE PARTIES. WE FIND THAT THE ASS ESSEE FILED APPEAL ON 12.02.2016 AGAINST INTIMATI ON ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE A CT DATED 01/12/2015 , WHICH WAS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN SERVED ON 15/12/2015. THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A ) ON 12.02. 2016 AND THUS , THERE 3 ITA NO . 5711/DEL/2016 IS A DELAY IN FIL ING APPEAL OF APPROXIMATELY 28 DAYS I.E. LESS THAN ONE MONTH FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE ORDER BY THE ASSESSEE . THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED FOR CONDONATION OF THE DELAY ON THE GROUND THAT INTIMATION WAS SENT BY EMAIL WHICH COULD NOT BE SENT TO THE OFFICE OF THE COUNSEL FOR FILING APPEAL ON THE TIME. ACCORDING TO THE LD. CIT(A) , THIS WAS NOT SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT FILING APPEAL ON TIME. WE FIND THAT FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN THE CASE OF M/S BHARTI (RBM) H OLDING PRIVATE LIMITED , WHILE DECIDING APPEAL NO. 347/2015 - 16 HAS CONDONED THE DELAY ON IDENTICAL GROUND S AND ADMITTED THE APPEAL OBSERVING AS UNDER: 3.0 THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT WAS FILED IN THIS OFFICE ON 12.02.2016 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED U/S 143(1) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. ON GOING THROUGH THE DET AILS, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH APPEAL WAS FILED, WAS SERVED ON 19.12.2015 AS EVIDENT FROM THE FORM NO. 35 SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT. AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE I.T. ACT, THE TIME LIMIT FOR FILING OF APPEAL WAS WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF SERVICE OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND. THEREFORE, THE COMPANY WAS REQUIRED TO FILE THE APPEAL ON OR BEFORE 18.01.2016 WHICH THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO DO. IN THIS REGARD, THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED ITS SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED FOR CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT THE INTIMATION DATED 01.12.2015 WAS EMAILED TO THE APPELLANT COMPANY ON 19.12.2015 AT THE REGISTERED E - MAIL OF THE COMPANY S ACCOUNTANT, DUE TO WHOSE OVERSIGHT THE APPEAL COULD NOT BE FILED IN TIME. AFFIDAVIT OF THE ACCOUNTANT TO THIS EFFECT WAS ALSO ENCLOSED. FOR THE SAKE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE AFORESAID SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT ARE ACCEPTED AND THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL IS HEREBY CONDONED. 4. MOREOVER, WE FIND THAT DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL IS FOR A PERIOD OF LESS THAN ONE MONTH. W E ARE OF THE VIEW BY NOT FILING THE APPEAL ON TIME, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT GETTING BENEFIT IN ANY MANNER AND , THEREFORE , THERE COULD BE NO INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IN MAKING DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL KNOWINGLY. WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT BE DEPRIVED OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE 4 ITA NO . 5711/DEL/2016 DUE TO DELAY OF SHORT PERIOD OF LESS THAN ONE MONTH AND THAT TOO EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE FIN DING OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DIRECT TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL AND DECIDE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 5. THE GROUND S OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 R D S E P T E M B E R , 2019. S D / - S D / - [ AMIT SHUKLA ] [O.P. KANT] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 3 R D S E P T E M B E R , 2019. RK/ - [D.T.D.S] COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(A) 5 . DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI