SHRI SURAJ SINGH, Dewas V. THE DCIT-1(1), Ujjain

ITA 648/IND/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5897 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 16-09-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MOHD JAVED
• Assessee Lawyers: S S DESHPANDE
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITANO.648/IND/2015: AY:2011-12 SURAJ SINGH GOUD PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SURAJ SINGH GOUD DEWAS PAN ACNPG 3266H VS. DCIT 1(1) UJJAIN APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI S.S. DESHPANDE RESPONDENT BY SHRI MOHD. JAVED DATE OF HEARING 2.8.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 2.8.2016 O R D E R PER O.P. MEENA ACCOUTANT MEMEBR. THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, UJJAIN, [HEREINAFTE R REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] DATED 30.6.2015 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 AS AGAINST APPEAL DECIDED I N ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 143(3) OF INCOME TAX ACT,1961 ( HEREIN AFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT) DATED 7.6.201 3 OF DCIT 1(1), UJJAIN [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE AO]. 2. AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FO R THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT THERE IS DELAY OF TWO I.T.A. NO. 648/IND/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 ITANO.648/IND/2015: AY:2011-12 SURAJ SINGH GOUD PAGE 2 OF 3 DAYS IN FILING OF THE APPEAL. THE APPEAL HAS BEEN F ILED ON 16.9.2015 BUT THE ORDERS WERE RECEIVED ON 16.7.2015 . THE DELAY WAS DUE TO THE DEATH IN THE FAMILY OF THE LEA RNED COUNSEL AND AS SUCH THE APPEAL COULD NOT BE FILED I N TIME. IT WAS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL MAY KINDLY BE CONDONED AND THE APPEAL MAY BE DECIDE D ON MERIT. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND CONSIDERING THE REASONING OF THE LEARNED C OUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN T IME. ACCORDINGLY, THE DELAY OF TWO DAYS IS CONDONED AND THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED TO BE PROCEEDED WITH. 4. GROUND NO. 1 RELATES TO MAINTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.5,26,223/- U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT BEING DISALL OWANCE OF INTEREST EXPENSES ON ACCOUNT OF NON-TDS. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES. THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL HAD AN OCCASION TO DECIDE AN IDENTICAL ISS UE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 2 .8.2016 IN ITA NO. 647/IND/2015 WHEREIN AFTER DISCUSSING THE I SSUE AT LENGTH, IT WAS HELD THAT THE DISALLOWANCE IS STATUT ORILY MADE ITANO.648/IND/2015: AY:2011-12 SURAJ SINGH GOUD PAGE 3 OF 3 BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND ACCORDINGLY THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WERE CONFIRMED. WE, THEREFORE, FO LLOWING THE REASONINGS GIVEN IN THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, FIND NO MERIT IN THIS GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE AND AS SUCH DISMISS THE SAME. 14. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND AUGUST, 2016. SD/- SD/- (D.T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER (O.P.MEENA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 2 ND AUGUST, 2016. DN/ COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE ASSESSEE/2. THE AO CONCERNED/3. THE LD. PCIT CONCERNED 4. THE LD. CIT(A)/5. THE LD. DR, INDORE/6. THE GUAR D FILE BY ORDER A.R. ITAT, INDORE