Patnaykuni Sudarsan, Visakhapatnam V. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 1, Visakhapatnam

ITA 79/VIZ/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7028 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 22-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K SONAWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M MURALIDHAR
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO , HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH , HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 79 / VIZ /201 9 (ASST. YEAR : 20 07 - 0 8 ) PATNAYAKUNI SUDARSAN, D.NO. 33 - 1 - 10/1, SOUTH JAIL ROAD, ALLIPURAM, VISAKHAPATNAM. V S . PR. CIT, VISAKHAPATNAM. PAN NO. AHWPP 6272 G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M. MURALIDHAR , C A. DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI D.K. SONAWAL SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 18 / 0 7 /201 9 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 / 0 7 /201 9 . O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER TH IS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1 , VISAKHAPATNAM , DATED 27 /0 3 /201 7 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 0 8 . 2. THERE IS A DELAY OF 366 DAYS IN FILING THIS APPEAL . LD.AR HAS SUBMITTED THAT DEL A Y WAS DUE TO WRONG ADVIC E GIVEN BY THE COUNSEL . THE DELAY HAS BEEN EXPLAINED IN THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AT PARA NO. 3 & 4 IS AS FOLLOWS : - 2 ITA NO. 79 /VIZ/2019 ( PATNAYAKUNI SUDARSAN ) 3. THAT THERE WAS A DELAY IN FILING APPEAL AT TRIBUNAL. THOUGH THIS APPEAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED IN TRIBUNAL ON OR BEFORE THE 21/02/2018 , COUNTING THE PERIOD OF SIXTY DAYS FO R THE DATE OF COMMUNICATION OF THE ORDER AS MENTIONED IN 2 ABOVE, NUMBER OF DAYS DELAYED IN EXCESS OF 60 DAYS WAS 366 DAYS ONLY. 4. THAT THE APPEAL COULD NOT BE SO FILED WHICH APPEARS TO BE A WRONG ADVISE OF THE COUNSEL I.E. LD. CIT(A) INFORMED US THE ISSUE HAS A QUE S TION OF FACT/LAW ARISING OUT OF 263 ORDER ALONE AND HE IS NOT COMPETENT TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES WITH REFERENCE TO SEC. 263 AND ALSO THE SAID ISSUE IS A MATTER OF CHANGE IN OPINION, CONTROVERSY AND A BROADER VIEW TAKEN BY THE LEARNED ITO, WARD - 1(2), U/S . 147 AND LD. CIT U/S 263. HENCE, THE APPEAL PREFERRED BEFORE ITAT AFTER A DELAY OF 366 DAYS. 3 . T HE ABOVE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IS A VAGUE AND ASSESSEE IS NOT ABLE TO ESTABLISH THAT THERE IS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO CONDONE THE DELAY . I N OUR OPIN I ON, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO CONDONE THE DELAY, THEREFORE, CONDONATION APPLICATION IS DISMISSED. ACCORDINGLY, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 4 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON TH IS 3 1 S T DAY OF JU LY , 201 9 . S D / - S D / - ( D.S. SUNDER SINGH ) ( V. DURGA RAO ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 3 1 S T JU LY , 201 9 . VR/ - 3 ITA NO. 79 /VIZ/2019 ( PATNAYAKUNI SUDARSAN ) COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE PATNAYAKUNI SUDARSAN, D.NO. 33 - 1 - 10/1, SOUTH JAIL ROAD, ALLIPURAM, VISAKHAPATNAM. 2. THE REVENUE - PR.CIT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE D.R . , VISAKHAPATNAM. 4. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (VUKKEM RAMBABU) SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM.