Mr. Rajesh Champalal Chordiya, Nashik V. ITO, Ward, 3(4), Malegaon, Malegaon

ITA 663/PUN/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 66324514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-05-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 30-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MUKESH VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: ABHAY A AVCHAT
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 148; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 663/PN/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) MR. RAJESH CHAMPALAL CHORDIYA C/O CHORDIYA & SONS, MANGRUL PHATA, CHANDWAD, NASHIK PAN : ABDPC4289R . APPELLANT VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(4), MALEGAON . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : MR. ABHAY A. AVCHAT RESPONDENT BY : MR. MUKESH VERMA DATE OF HEARING : 29-05-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29-05-2013 ORDER PER G. S. PANNU, AM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST AN ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I, NASHIK DATE D 30.01.2012 WHICH, IN TURN, HAS ARISEN FROM AN ORDER DATED 27.12.2010 PAS SED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, UNDER SECTION 144 READ WITH SECTION 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT), PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISMISSED BY THE CIT(A) IN LIMINIE NOTICING THAT THE SAME WAS FILED BELATED LY BY 16 DAYS. THE CIT(A) HAS NOTICED THAT WHEN THE FINAL OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING WAS GRANTED ON 31.01.2012, THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM T HE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT EVEN FURNISH THE REASONS FOR T HE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAM E HAS BEEN DISMISSED ON THE GROUND THAT IT WAS BELATED. BEFORE US, ASSESSEE ITA NO. 663/PN/2012 MR. RAJESH CHAMPALAL CHORDIYA A.Y. 2006-07 CONTENDED THAT NON-RESPONSE BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS N OT DELIBERATE BUT WAS UNINTENDED. THE LEARNED COUNSEL POINTED OUT THAT THOUGH THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT MAKE DETAILED SUBMISSIONS SHOWIN G THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY, SO HOWEVER EVEN AT THE TIME OF FILIN G OF APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) VIDE COVERING LETTER DATED 22.02.2011, T HE ASSESSEE HAD POINTED OUT THE DELAY AND REQUESTED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. THE LEARNED COUNSEL UNDERTOOK THAT IN CASE THE MATTER I S SET-ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE WOULD APPEAR AND C OMPLY WITH THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE CIT(A). THE LEARNED COUNSEL F URTHER POINTED OUT THAT THERE WAS NO NON-BONAFIDE REASON WITH THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT COMPLYING WITH THE NOTICES AND THAT IT WAS MERE WAN T OF UNDERSTANDING ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH LED TO THE NON- COMPLIANCE. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPR ESENTATIVE WHILE RELYING UPON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DID NOT SERIOUSLY OPPOSE THE PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REMANDING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIO NS. OSTENSIBLY, PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE REQUIRE T HAT THE SUBSTANTIVE REQUIREMENTS OF ADJUDICATING AN ISSUE ON MERITS SHO ULD PREVAIL OVER TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THOU GH THE EXACT REASONS FOR THE DELAY COULD NOT BE CANVASSED BEFORE THE CIT(A) FOR THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE YET IT IS CLEAR THAT TH E DELAY IS OF A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF DAYS I.E. 16 DAYS. BE THAT AS IT MA Y, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE MATTER BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WHO SHALL ALLOW THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OP PORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY AND IF THE SAME A RE FOUND SUFFICIENT, THE DELAY BE CONDONED AND THEREAFTER TH E CIT(A) MAY ITA NO. 663/PN/2012 MR. RAJESH CHAMPALAL CHORDIYA A.Y. 2006-07 PROCEED TO ADJUDICATE THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS AS PER LAW. 5. RESULTANTLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED AS ABOVE FOR THE STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. THE ABOVE DECISION WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COU RT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES AT THE CONCLUSION OF T HE HEARING ON 29 TH MAY, 2013. SD/- SD/- (R.S. PADVEKAR) (G.S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 29 TH MAY, 2013 SUJEET COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : - 1) THE ASSESSEE; 2) THE DEPARTMENT; 3) THE CIT(A)-I, NASHIK; 4) THE CIT-I, NASHIK; 5) THE DR, A BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE; 6) GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// PRIVATE SECRETARY I.T.A.T., PUNE