- 1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BEN CH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 6373 & 6374/MUM/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR:- 2007-08 SURESH R. SARAF, E/505, EMERALD APARTMENT, P.P. ROAD, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI 69 VS. I.T.O. WARD 20 (3) (2), PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, 6 TH FLOOR, LALBAUG, MUMBAI PAN:- AAEPS9094A APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI M. SUBRAMANIAM RESPONDENT BY SHRI ASHOK SURI ORDER PER I.P. BANSAL, JM BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEY ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE TWO SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) DATED 10 TH JANUARY 2012 AND 16 TH JULY 2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. ONE WITH REGARD TO PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(1)(C) AND OTHER WITH REGARD TO PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271(1)(B). 2. IT MAY BE MENTIONED HERE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS F ILED THESE APPEALS BELATEDLY. THE DELAY IS OF 17 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HA S REQUESTED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN THE STATEMENT OF FACTS FILED BEFORE US BY STATING THAT DELAY IN SUBMISSION OF APPEAL IS CAUSED DUE TO SERIOUS ILLNESS OF CHART ERED ACCOUNTANT OF THE ASSESSEE LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING 18-12-2013 ?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18-12-2013 - 2 - WHO IS ABOUT 80 YEARS OLD. THE REASONS STATED FOR C ONDONATION DELAY IS SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT FILED BY SHRI SURESH RAMPRASAD SARA F. IN THE AFFIDAVIT IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ATTEND THE HE ARING BEFORE CIT(A) DUE TO SERIOUS ILLNESS OF HIS FATHER WHO UNFORTUNATELY EX PIRED DURING THE TIME OF PROCEDURE AND SECONDLY THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT CONTA CT HIS CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WHO WAS ALSO SERIOUSLY ILL AND WAS EIGHTY YEARS OF AGE. THE AFFIDAVIT IS PLACED ON RECORD. IT MAY BE FURTHER MENTIONED THAT BOTH THE O RDERS PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) ARE EX PARTE ORDERS. 3. AT THE OUTSET IT WAS PLEADED BY THE LD. AR THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL WHICH IS A MINOR DELAY OF 17 DAYS SHOULD BE CONDONED AND ALSO THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT (A) AS T HE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON APPEARANCE BEFORE CIT(A) W HEREBY THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY CIT(A) BY DECIDING TH E SAME IN ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NON COOPERATIVE AND HAD NOT APPEARED BEFORE THE CIT (A), THEREFORE, HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT DESERVE ANY BENEFIT ON ACCOUNT OF HIS LAPSES. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND THEIR CONTENT IONS HAVE CAREFULLY BEEN CONSIDERED. THE CAUSE FOR FILING THE BELATED APPEAL HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN THE STATEMENT OF FACTS ITSELF AND SUCH CAUSE IS SUPPORT ED BY AN AFFIDAVIT FILED BY ASSESSEE. SIMILARLY, THE CAUSE OF NON APPEARANCE BE FORE CIT(A) HAS ALSO BEEN MENTIONED IN THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. K EEPING IN VIEW THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, AS THESE ARE PENALTY MATTERS, WE CONSIDER IT JUST AND PROPER TO RESTORE BOTH - 3 - THE APPEALS TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) WITH THE DIRE CTION TO RE-ADJUDICATE THE SAME AFTER GIVING PROPER AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF H EARING TO THE ASSESSEE, WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS CONSIDERED TO THE ALLOWED IN THE MANNER AFORESAID. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 -12-2 013. SD/- SD/- (N.K. BILLAIYA) (I.P. BANSAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER SKS SR. P.S, MUMBAI DATED 18-12-2013 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A) 4. THE CONCERNED CIT 5. THE DR, E BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI