Reliance Cellulose Products Ltd., Hyd, Secunderabad V. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad, Hyderabad

ITA 793/HYD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2501 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 22-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 27-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUMAN MALIK
• Assessee Lawyers: C SURESH
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause; Capital receipt; Condonation of delay
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 793/HYD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 RELIANCE CELLULOSE PRODUCTS LTD., HYDERABAD. PAN AABCR 0766Q VS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 3(1), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI C. SURESH FOR REVENUE : SMT. SUMAN MALIK DATE OF HEARING : 22-05-2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24-05-2017 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M.: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-10, HYDERABAD, DATED 13-01-2016 FOR THE AY. 204-05, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE HON'BLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -10, HYDERABAD, IS IN ERROR IN DISMISSING THE APPELLANT COMPANY'S APPEAL' IN LIMINE' CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THERE HAS BEEN DELAY OF ONLY ONE WEEK IN FILING THE APPEAL IN RESPECT OF WHICH REASONABLE CAUSE HAS BEEN DULY SHOWN IN THE APPEAL LETTER FILED BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY ON 31.03.2010. 2. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-10, HYDERABAD, IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND ALSO AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE, EQUITY AND GOOD CONSCIENCE. 3. THE APPELLANT COMPANY APPEALS FOR A FAIR OPPORTU NITY TO PLEAD ITS CASE WITH REGARD TO THE ISSUE INVOLVED, IN THE INTERESTS OF NATURAL JUSTICE. I.T.A. NO. 793/HYD/2016 M/S RELIANCE CELLULOSE PRODUCTS LTD. :- 2 -: 4. ANY OTHER GROUND OR GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE AO TR EATED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 14,47,196/- IN RESPECT OF ASSIGNMENT OF SALES T AX DEFERMENT LOAN BY THE ASSESSEE, AS A REVENUE RECEIPT. WHEN THE ASS ESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION U/S 154 STATING THAT THE ASSIGNMENT OF SALES TAX LIABILITY MAY BE TREATED AS CAPITAL RECEIPT WAS REJECTED BY T HE AO VIDE LETTER DATED 17 TH FEBRUARY, 2010. 3. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFO RE THE CIT(A). THOUGH THE CIT(A) GAVE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES TO ASSESSEE, THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE FROM THE ASSESSEE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE CIT(A) AND HENCE, THE CIT(A) PROCEEDED TO DECIDE TH E APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3.1 ON PERUSAL OF RECORD, THE CIT(A) NOTICED THAT T HERE WAS A DELAY OF 10 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE HIM. SINCE T HERE WAS NO PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY FROM THE ASSESSEE, A LETTE R DATED 18/12/2015 WAS ADDRESSED TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE R EASONS FOR DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL. SINCE THERE WAS NO REASON/EXPL ANATION FROM THE ASSESSEE FOR THE SAID DELAY, THE CIT(A) DISMISSED T HE APPEAL IN LIMINE. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE ASSESS EE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL FACTS ON RECORD. THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE ON THE GROUND THAT THERE WAS NO RESPONSE/EXPLANATION FROM THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONAT ION OF DELAY. HOWEVER, ON PERUSAL OF RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE FILED A LETTER DATED 30/03/2010 AND THERE WAS AN AC KNOWLEDGMENT BY I.T.A. NO. 793/HYD/2016 M/S RELIANCE CELLULOSE PRODUCTS LTD. :- 3 -: THE OFFICE OF THE CIT(A)-IV ON 31/03/2010 RECEIVING THE LETTER. IN THE SAID LETTER, IT WAS STATED AS UNDER: THE ABOVE APPEAL IS TO BE FILED BY 22/03/2010. THER E HAS BEEN A DELAY FOR ONE WEEK IN FILING THE APPEAL SINCE THE MD OF THE COMPANY HAS BEEN ON ALONG BUSINESS TOUR. FURTHER T HE AR COULD NOT ATTEND TO THE FILING OF APPEAL ON ACCOUNT OF PR ESSING PERSONAL PROBLEMS. HENCE, IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE DELAY OF ONE WEEK MAY KINDLY BE CONDONED. 5.1 WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THE CIT(A) MISSED TO SEE THE SAID LETTER FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM. AS THE ASS ESSEE FILED A LETTER FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY AND THE REASONS STATED THE REIN ARE REASONABLE PREVENTING THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE APPEAL BEFORE T HE CIT(A) WITHIN THE STIPULATED TIME, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE REM IT THE FILE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR HEARING AND ADJUDICATION, ON MERITS. ACC ORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STAT ISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH MAY, 2017. SD/- SD/- (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (V. DURGA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 24 TH MAY , 2017. KV 1 M/S RELIANCE CELLULOSE PRODUCTS LTD., C/O M/S SEK HAR AND SURESH, CAS., 133/4, R.P. ROAD, SECUNDERABAD 500 003. 2 CIT(A)- 10, INCOME TAX TOWERS, AC GUARDS, HYDERA BAD. 3 CIT (A)-1, HYDERABAD. 4 CIT (IT & TP), HYDERABAD. 5 THE DR, ITAT HYDERABAD 6 GUARD FILE I.T.A. NO. 793/HYD/2016 M/S RELIANCE CELLULOSE PRODUCTS LTD. :- 4 -: 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P.S./PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER