MODERN MACHINERY STORE, Alwar V. ACIT, Alwar

ITA 718/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9689 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 20-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA CIT DHK
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 37(1)

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH DQY HKKJR U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 718/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11. M/ S MODERN MACHINERY STORE, STATION ROAD, ALWAR (RAJ.) CUKE VS. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ALWAR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAEFM2153J VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C. PARWAL (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA (ADDL. CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 22/03/2017 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22/03/2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) ALWAR DATED 01.06.2016 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2010-11. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1. THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IS NOT CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL AT THE THRESHOLD LEVEL AND ALSO ERRED IN DISMISSING THE SAME THUS DEPRIVIN G THE ASSESSEE FROM THE JUSTICE. 2. THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN LAW AS W ELL AS ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN MAKING A DISALLOWA NCE OF RS. 108000.00 WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 40A(IA) OF THE IT ACT 1961 AND THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN NOT GIVING ANY FI NDING THEREON. 3. THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN MAKING A DISALLOWA NCE OF RS. 2 ITA NO. 718/JP/2016 M/S MODERN MACHINERY STORE, ALWAR. 14000.00 AND 26500.00 PAID ON ACCOUNT OF DONATIONS AND GIFTS WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 37(1) OF THE IT TAX 1 961 AND THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT GIVING ANY FINDING THEREON. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL PREFERRED BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WAS DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF DELAY. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACTS THAT, THERE WAS NO DELIBERATE OR MALAFIDE FOR NOT PREFERRING THE APPE AL WITHIN THE LIMITATION PRESCRIBED UNDER THE LAW. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE DE LAY WAS CAUSED DUE TO BONAFIDE REASONS. HE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE JUDGME NT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION VS. MST. KATIJI & OTHERS 167 ITR 471 (SC). 3. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE S OPPOSED THE SUBMISSIONS. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORDS AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE AUTHOR ITIES BELOW. UNDER THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE THE CONTENTION OF THE ASS ESSEE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PREFER AN APPEAL AS THE ORDER REMAIN WIT H THE ACCOUNTANT AND HE FORGOT TO HAND OVER THE SAME TO THE ASSESSEE, WHEN IT CAME TO THE NOTICE OF THE ASSESSEE HE PROJECT THE C.A. FOR FILING THE APP EAL. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION VS . MST. KATIJI & OTHERS 167 ITR 471 (SC) HAS HELD AS UNDER:- THE LEGISLATURE HAS CONFERRED POWER TO CONDONE DE LAY BY ENACTING SECTION 5 O THE LIMITATION ACT, 1963, IN ORDER TO ENABLE THE COURTS TO DO SUBSTANTI AL JUSTICE TO PARTIES BY DISPOSING OF MATTERS ON 3 ITA NO. 718/JP/2016 M/S MODERN MACHINERY STORE, ALWAR. MERITS. THE EXPRESSION SUFFICIENT CAUSE IN SECTI ON 5 IS ADEQUATELY ELASTIC TO ENABLE THE COURTS TO APPLY THE LAW IN A MEANINGFUL MANNER WHICH SUBSERVE S THE ENDS OF JUSTICE-THAT BEING THE LIFE- PURPOSE OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE INSTITUTION OF COURTS. A J USTIFIABLY LIBERAL APPROACH HAS TO BE ADOPTED ON PRINCIPLE. EVERY DAY DELAY MUST BE EXPLAINED DOES NOT IMPLY A PEDANTIC APPROACH. THE DOCTRINE MUST BE APPLIED IN A RATIONAL, COMMON SENSE AND PRAGMATIC M ANNER. THE DOCTRINE OF EQUALITY BEFORE LAW DEMANDS THAT AL L LITIGATIONS, INCLUDING THE STATE AS A LITIGANT, A RE ACCORDED THE SAME TREATMENT AND THE LAW IS ADMINIST ERED IN AN EVENHANDED MANNER. THERE IS NO WARRANT FOR ACCORDING A STEP-MOTHERLY TREATMENT WHE N THE STATE IS THE APPLICANT PRAYING FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. WHEN SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE AND TECHNICAL CONSIDERATI ONS ARE PITTED AGAINST EACH OTHER, THE CAUSE OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE DESERVES TO BE PREFERRED, FOR T HE OTHER SIDE CANNOT CLAIM TO HAVE A VESTED RIGHT I N INJUSTICE BEING DONE BECAUSE OF A NON-DELIBERATE DE LAY. RESPECTIVELY FOLLOWING RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONB E SUPREME COURT, WE HEREBY CONDONE THE DELAY AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DECISION AFRESH ON MERIT. THUS, GROUND NO. 1 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. GROUND NO. 2 AND 3 ARE ALSO RESTORED TO THE FILE O F THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DECISION ON MERIT. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 718/JP/2016 , IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON WEDNESDAY , THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2017. SD/- SD/- HKKXPAN DQY HKKJR (BHAGCHAND) (KUL BHARAT) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER 4 ITA NO. 718/JP/2016 M/S MODERN MACHINERY STORE, ALWAR. TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 22 /03/2017. POOJA/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ M/S MODERN MACHINERY STORE, ALWAR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ALWAR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 718/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR