Sh. Harendra Gupta, Ghaziabad V. ITO, Ghaziabad

ITA 6735/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6334 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 11-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 22-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA
• Assessee Lawyers: V M CHAURASIA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Condonation of delay
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-I NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-6735/DE L/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2011-12) HARENDRA GUPTA, 226, BALAJI VIHAR, MOHAN NAGAR, ARTHLA, GHAZIABAD, U.P PAN: AJUPG6472H (APPELLANT) VS ITO, WARD-1(3), GHAZIABAD (RESPONDENT) A SSESSEE BY SH.V.M.CHAURASIA, ADV. REVENUE BY SH. MANOJ KUMAR CHOPRA, SR.DR ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2015 OF CIT(A) , GHAZIABAD PERTAINING TO 2011-12 AY ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. THE PARTIES WERE HE ARD IN RESPECT TO GROUND NO.2 WHICH READS AS UNDER:- 2.(I) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS BAD AS THE SAME HAS BEEN P ASSED WITHOUT GIVING ASSESSEE AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IN CL EAR VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. (II) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW, IN REJECTING TH E APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONTATION OF DELAY. 2. BOTH THE PARTIES WERE HEARD. 3. THE RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT AGGRIEVE D BY THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 18.07.2013 U/S 154 THE ASSESSEE CAME IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSE E WAS LATE. EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR FILING THE APPEAL BEYOND THE STATUTORY LIMITATION THE ASSESSEE IS FOUND TO HAVE STATED AS UNDER:- DATE OF HEARING 11.02.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28.03.2016 I.T.A .NO.-6735/DEL/2015 PAGE 2 OF 3 AS I AM NOT SO EDUCATED AND NOT WELL VERSED WITH INCOME TAX LAW AND ALL PAPERS OF DEMAND AND PENALTY WAS LYING WITH MY CONSULTANTS SH. ATUL JINDAL, WHO ALSO NOT ASK ME TO FILE APPEA L WITH IN PRESCRIBED TIME LIMIT OF 30 DAYS. SO NOW WHEN I . T. DEPARTMENT HAS RAISED DEMAND THEN AFTER KNOWING THE PROCEDURE I WANT TO FILE APPEAL BEFORE YOU. (EMPHASIS PROVIDED) 4. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED ON THE FOLLOWING REASONING:- THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT CAN NOT BE ACCEPT ABLE SINCE APPEAL SHOULD BE FILED BY THE APPELLANT. IT IS NOT THE CAS E OF THE APPELLANT THAT APPEAL PAPERS WERE HANDED OVER TO THE ADVOCATE AND THEN HE DID NOT FILE THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, REASONS CITED FOR DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL BEING NOT PLAUSIBLE AND THE DELAY APPLICATIO N CANNOT BE ENTERTAINED. (EMPHASIS PROVIDED) 4.1. BOTH THE PARTIES WERE HEARD. THE LD.AR INVITI NG ATTENTION TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER SUBMITTED THAT AS PER ASSESSEES EXP LANATION EXTRACTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER ITSELF IT HAS BEEN RECORDED THAT ALL PAPERS WERE WITH HIS CONSULTANTS WHO DID NOT ADVISE HIM TO FILE ANY APPE AL. THE CONTRADICTION IN THE CONCLUSION IS EVIDENT. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES IT WAS HIS PRAYER THAT THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE SATISFIED IF OPPORTUNITY TO FILE A PROPER AND FRESH CONDONATION OF DELAY PETITION BEFORE THE CIT(A) IS PROVIDED IN ORDER TO EXPLAIN THE CAUSES OF DELAY FOR WHICH PURPOSES THE IMPUGNED ORDER MAY BE SET ASIDE. 5. THE LD. SR.DR IN THE FACE OF THE CONTRADICTION O N RECORD HAD NO OBJECTION IF THE ISSUE IS RESTORED BACK. 6. HAVING HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MAT ERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, I AM OF THE VIEW IN THE LIGHT OF THE SUBMIS SIONS OF THE PARTIES THE LIMITED PRAYER OF THE LD.AR DESERVES TO BE ACCEPTED AS EVID ENTLY THERE IS A CONTRADICTION IN THE FINDING RECORDED BY THE CIT(A). THE IMPUGNE D ORDER IS ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FILE A PROPER C ONDONATION OF DELAY PETITION BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO SHALL PASS A SPEAKING ORDER I N ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEI NG HEARD. IT IS HOPED THAT THE I.T.A .NO.-6735/DEL/2015 PAGE 3 OF 3 OPPORTUNITY SO PROVIDED SHOULD NOT BE ABUSED AS FAI LING WHICH THE CIT(A) WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANC E WITH LAW. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH OF MARCH, 2016. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JU DICIAL MEMBER DATED:28/03/2016 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTA NT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI