V. Narasimha Goud, Hyd, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-15(4), Hyd, Hyderabad

ITA 804/HYD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4991 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 4 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-10-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NARAYANA MURTHY NAIR
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMA RAO
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside
• Section: 271(1)(c); 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING ) BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 8 04 /HYD./2016 A.Y. 20 10 - 11 & ITA NO. 2181 /HYD./201 7 A.Y. 2010 - 11 SRI V.NARASIMHA GOUD VS. ITO WARD 15(4) HYDERABAD HYDERABAD PAN: A QBPG6789K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SH. S. RAMA RAO, ADV. FOR REVENUE : SH. NARAYANA MURTHY NAIR, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 30/09/2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12 / 10 /2020 O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. B OTH ARE ASSESSEES APPEALS FOR A.Y. 2010 - 11 AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) - 7 , HYDERABAD DATED 29 TH OCTOBER,2015 CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO AND ALSO CONFIRMING THE PENALTY LEVIED BY AO U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T.ACT RESPECTIVELY. THE APPEALS WERE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 30.09.20 20 THROUGH VIDEO CONFEREN C ING AND BOTH THE PARTIES WERE HEARD. ITA NO. 804 /HYD/2016 AND ITA 2181 /HYD/201 7 AY 20 10 - 11 SRI VUTUKUR NARSIMHA GOUD 2 2. ON GOING THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), WE FIND THAT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A). BEFORE US, THE LD.COUNSEL FO R THE ASSESSEE PRAYED FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THE FACTS BEFORE THE CIT(A). 2.1. AT THE OUTSET, WE FIND THAT THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WITH A DELAY OF 154 DAYS AND ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY STATING AS UNDER. BEFORE HONBLE ITAT HYDERABAD A.Y. 2010 - 11 V.NARSIMHA GOUD HYD VS.ITO, WARD 15(4), HYD. PETITION REQUESTING FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY THE PETITIONER IS AN INDIVIDUAL. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11, HE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ADMITTING AN INCOME OF RS.2,79,409/ - UNDER THE HEAD LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN DERIVED BECAUSE OF THE COMPENSATION RECEIVED FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FOR COMPULSORY ACQUISITION OF HIS LAND FOR OUTER RING ROAD. THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U / S 143(3) RWS 147 ON 23.01.2015 DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.79,86,553/ - . ON AN APPEAL FILED, THE HON'BLE CIT (A) VIDE ORDER IN ITA NO.1058/CIT (A) - 7/2014 - 15 DATED 29.10.2015 DISMISSED THE APPEAL. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE L EARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) WAS AN EX PARTE ORDER AS THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) AS HE MET WITH AN ACCIDENT DUE TO SLIP WHILE BOARDING THE TRAIN ON 9.8.2015 AT HOWRAH RAILWAY STATION FROM WHERE HE WAS SENT TO HYDERABAD BY AIR AFTER EMERGENCY TREATMENT IN THE RAILWAY HOSPITAL, WHICH RESULTED IN FRACTURES IN BOTH THE HIPS AND HE HAS BECOME IMMOBILE. RAILWAY HOSPITAL PRESCRIPTION MEMO DATED 09.08.2015 IS ANNEXED. AS HE WAS BED RIDDEN AND COULD NOT SUBMIT THE E VIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIMS MADE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) DECIDED THE APPEAL EX PARTE. THIS FACT IS ALSO MENTIONED IN THE APPELLATE ORDER OF THE CIT (A). THE APPEAL WAS DISPOSED OF VIDE ORDER DATED 29.10.2015. AS THE PETITIO NER DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD, WAS BED RIDDEN, THE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEALS) WAS SERVED ON SOME ONE ELSE AT HIS RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS WHICH WAS NOT IN HIS KNOWLEDGE. THE FAMILY MEMBERS AND ALSO THE PETITIONER ARE NOT EDUCATED. THE DATE OF SERVICE OF THE A PPELLATE ORDER OF CIT (APPEALS) WAS NOT NOTED. DUE TO THE ACCIDENT, THE PETITIONER WAS ADMITTED IN SOORYA ORTHOPAEDIC HOSPITAL, KAMALANAGAR, ECIL, HYDERABAD ON 9.8.2015. THE MEDICAL RECORD AND INVESTIGATION REPORTS AT LUCID MEDICAL DIAGNOSTIC LAB ARE ANNE XED TO THIS PETITION. THE GRAVITY OF THE INJURIES ARE MENTIONED AT PAGE NO.5 OF THE MEDICAL RECORD ANNEXED. THE PETITIONER HUMBLY SUBMITS THAT HE IS AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS AND, THEREFORE, THE RECOVERY OF HIS HEALTH TOOK LONGER PERIOD. WHEN HE WAS UNDER CONVAL ESCENCE, HIS MOTHER SMT. V. SATYAMMA PASSED AWAY ON 6.11.2015. A COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE OF HIS MOTHER IS ALSO ANNEXED TO THIS PETITION. THE TWO MAJOR INCIDENTS DISTURBED THE FAMILY. IN THIS SITUATION THE APPELLATE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEALS) WAS LYING UN ATTENDED. WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER INITIATED PROCEEDINGS U / S 271(1)(C) AND PASSED AN ORDER UNDER THE SAID SECTION ON 18.2.2016, THE APPELLATE ORDER OF CIT (A) HAS COME TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE PETITIONER. THE PETITIONER WAS CONTEMPLATING TO DISCUSS THE M ATTER WITH AN ADVOCATE FOR CARRYING THE MATTER FURTHER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITAT. HOWEVER, DUE TO CONTINUED ILL HEALTH AND DIFFICULTY IN MOVEMENTS, HE COULD NOT CONSULT THE ADVOCATE TILL 27.5.2016. THE MATTER WAS DISCUSSED WITH THE ADVOCATE ON 28.0 5.2015 AND GOT THE APPEAL PAPERS READY BY 29.05.2016. THE SAME IS BEING FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITAT ON 30.05.2016, 29TH MAY BEING SUNDAY. RECKONING THE DATE OF THE ORDER, THERE IS A DELA Y OF 154 DAYS IN FILING THE A P PEAL. THE PETITIONER HUMBLY SUBMITS TH AT THE DELAY IS FOR THE REASONS SUBMITTED ABOVE WHICH ARE BEYOND THE CONTROL ITA NO. 804 /HYD/2016 AND ITA 2181 /HYD/201 7 AY 20 10 - 11 SRI VUTUKUR NARSIMHA GOUD 3 OF THE PETITIONER AND IS NOT INTENTIONAL. THE PETITIONER, THEREFORE, PRAYS THE HON'BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL TO KINDLY CONDONE THE DELAY AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS IN THE MATTER. DT. 29.5.2016 SD/ - (V.NARSIMHA) PETITIONER IN SUPPORT OF HIS APPLICATION AND ALSO THE CONTENTS THEREIN, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE S . TAKING THE SAME INTO CONSIDERATION , AND ALSO THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATES IN SUPPORT OF ASSESSEES CONTENTIONS, WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL AS UNDER: 3. WE FIND THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS ON ACCOUNT OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND THE RELEVANT FACTS WERE NOT PRODUCED BEFORE THE CIT(A) DUE TO WHICH THE CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMAND THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ISSUE AND ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FILE ALL RELEVANT DETAILS BEFORE THE CIT(A) FOR EARLY DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL. 4. SINCE THE QUANTUM APPEAL HAS BEEN SET ASIDE TO CIT(A) , THE PENALTY APPEAL IN ITA 2181/H/1 7 IS ALSO SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) , WITH A DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE SAME AFTER HE DECIDES THE Q UANTUM APPEAL. A CCORDINGLY , WE SET ASIDE THE PENALTY APPEAL TO THE FILE OF CIT(A). 5 . IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 12 TH OCTOBER, 2020. SD/ - SD/ - (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT ME MBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 12 TH OCTOBER, 2020 . *GMV ITA NO. 804 /HYD/2016 AND ITA 2181 /HYD/201 7 AY 20 10 - 11 SRI VUTUKUR NARSIMHA GOUD 4 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. SRI V.NARSIMHA GOUD, C/O SRI S. RAMA RAO, ADVOCATE, FLAT NO.102, SHRIYAS ELEGANCE, 3 - 6 - 643, STREET NO.9, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD 2. ITO, WARD 15 (4), HYDERABAD /ACIT, RANGE 15, HYDERABAD 3. CIT(A) - 7 , HYDERABAD 4. PR. CI T - 7 , HYDERABAD . 5. DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6 . GUARD FILE.