Pavan Developers, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 710/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1322 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 10-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 22-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANITA HARDSANI
• Assessee Lawyers: B R POPAT
• Section: 40A(3); 143(3); 194C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH BEFORE: S H RI PRAMOD KUMAR , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHR I S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER PAVAN DEVELOPERS, B - 24, MATRUSHAKTI SOCIETY, INDIA COLONY ROAD, BAPUNAGAR, AHMEDABAD - 3800024 PAN:AAIFP8239J (APPELLANT) VS THE ITO, WARD - 9(1), AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S MT. ANITA HARDSANI, D . R. ASSESSEE BY: S H RI B.R. POPAT , A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 10 - 05 - 2 016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 - 06 - 2 016 / ORDER P ER : S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER : - THIS A SSESSEE S APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2011 - 12 , AR IS ES FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 5, AHMEDABAD DATED 20 - 01 - 2016 IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A) - 5/ITO.WD. 9(1)/156/2014 - 15 , IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . I T A NO . 710 / A HD/20 16 A SSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 I.T.A NO . 710 /AHD/20 16 A.Y. 2011 - 12 PAGE NO PAVAN DEVELOPERS VS. ITO 2 2. A PERUSAL OF THE CASE FILE REVEALS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL BY NOT CONDONING DELAY OF 2 & MONTHS WITHOUT GOING INTO MERITS OF THE CASE. THE ASSESSEE IS A FIRM ENGAGED IN CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING PROJECTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FRAM ED A REGULAR ASSESSMENT IN QUESTION ON 09 - 01 - 2014 INTER ALIA MAKING ADDITIONS U/S. 194C R.W.S. 200 OF THE ACT AND THAT UNDER SECTION 40A(3) AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,02,500/ - AND RS. 1,40,200/ - ;RESPECTIVELY. 3. THE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO HAVE FILED ITS APPEAL ON 29 - 04 - 2014. IT ATTRIBUTED REASON OF ITS LATE FILING THAT IT WAS COMPLETELY DEPENDENT UPON THE SERVICES OF ITS CHARTE R ED ACCOUNT/ TAX CONSULTANT FOR ITS EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION IN COURSE OF SCRUTINY. ITS CASE WAS THAT THERE AROSE A LITIGATION ON THE ISSUE O F PROFESSIONAL FEE WITH ITS TAX CONSULTANT AND NET RESULT THEREOF THAT IT COULD NOT SUBMIT THE RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND THE APPEAL IN QUESTION WITHIN TIME LIMIT OF 30 DAYS. THE CIT(A) DOES NOT TREAT THESE PLEADINGS AS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR CONDONING THE IMPUG NED DELAY OF 2 & MONTHS LEAVING THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED. IT EMANATES FROM THE LOWER APPELLATE ORDER THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT REBUTTED ASSESSEE S SPECIFIC AVERMENTS IN ITS CONDONATION PETITIO N ATTRIBUTING THE IMPUGNED DELAY OF 2 & MONTHS TO A FEE DISPUTE WITH ITS CHARTERED ACCOUNT/TAX CONSULTANT. HE DOES NOT EVEN CALL FOR PARTICULARS OF THE AFORESAID CONSULTANT FROM THE ASSESSEE. WE I.T.A NO . 710 /AHD/20 16 A.Y. 2011 - 12 PAGE NO PAVAN DEVELOPERS VS. ITO 3 OBSERVE IN THESE FACTS TH AT THE LOWER APPELLATE AUTHORIT Y HA S ERRED IN REJECTING ASSESSEE S CONDONATION PETITION THEREBY DISMISSING ITS APPEAL IN QUESTION. WE ACCORDINGLY FIND IT A FIT CASE TO CONDONE DELAY AND DIRECT THE CIT(A) TO ADJUDICATE ASSESSEE S APPEAL ON MERITS ALONG WITH ITS APPLICATION SEEKING ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCE. 5. THIS ASSESSEE S APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 29 - 06 - 201 6 SD/ - SD/ - ( PRAMOD KUMAR ) ( S. S. GODARA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUD ICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 2 9 /06 /2016 AK / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,