Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Bilaspur , Rampur V. ITO- 1(2), Rampur

ITA 8044/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1265 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 18-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAMES SINGSON

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D, NEW DELHI , !' # %&'()* , +,-+' BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, VP & SH. PRASHANT MAHARI SHI, AM . / ITA NO.8039/DEL/2018 /0 * * / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17 M/S KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, NAVEEN MANDI STHAL, HASANPUR ROAD SAMBHAL, U.P. PAN-AAAAK6125F .......... 12 /APPELLANT VS DCIT-CPC, BANGALORE (LOCAL-ITO-1(5), SAMBHAL U.P. ... %312 / RESPONDENT . / ITA NO.8040/DEL/2018 /0 * * / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 M/S KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, BIJNOR ROAD, KIRATPUR, U.P. PAN-AAAAK5785B .......... 12 /APPELLANT VS DCIT-CPC, BANGALORE (LOCAL-ITO-3(1), NAZIBABAD-1 U.P. ... %312 / RESPONDENT . / ITA NO.8041/DEL/2018 /0 * * / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 M/S KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, NAVEEN MANDI STHAL, DISTT, RAMPUR U.P. PAN-AAAJK1066A .......... 12 /APPELLANT VS DCIT-CPC, BANGALORE (LOCAL-ITO-1(2), RAMPUR -1 U.P. ... %312 / RESPONDENT . / ITA NOS:-8039,8040,8041,8042,8043,8044&8045/DEL/201 8 2 . / ITA NO.8042/DEL/2018 /0 * * / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 M/S KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, ISLAMNAGAR, BADAUN, U.P. PAN-AACAK5329 .......... 12 /APPELLANT VS DCIT-CPC, BANGALORE (LOCAL-ITO-2(3), BADAUN-1 U.P. ... %312 / RESPONDENT . / ITA NO.8043/DEL/2018 /0 * * / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 M/S KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, NAVEEN MANDI STHAL, KOTDWARA ROAD, NAZIBABAD, U.P. PAN-AAAJK0917C .......... 12 /APPELLANT VS DCIT-CPC, BANGALORE (LOCAL-ITO-3(1), NAZIBABAD-1 U.P. ... %312 / RESPONDENT . / ITA NO.8044/DEL/2018 /0 * * / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 M/S KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, BILASPUR, U.P. PAN-AAALK0579L .......... 12 /APPELLANT VS DCIT-CPC, BANGALORE (LOCAL-ITO-1(2), RAMPUR-1 U.P. ... %312 / RESPONDENT . / ITA NOS:-8039,8040,8041,8042,8043,8044&8045/DEL/201 8 3 . / ITA NO.8045/DEL/2018 /0 * * / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 M/S KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, NAGINA, BIJNOR, U.P. PAN-AABTK1252H .......... 12 /APPELLANT VS DCIT-CPC, BANGALORE (LOCAL-ITO-3(1), NAZIBABAD-1 U.P. ... %312 / RESPONDENT AND . / ITA NO.8046/DEL/2018 /0 * * / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 M/S KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, NAGINA, BIJNOR, U.P. PAN-AABTK1252H .......... 12 /APPELLANT VS DCIT-CPC, BANGALORE (LOCAL-ITO-3(1), NAZIBABAD-1 U.P. ... %312 / RESPONDENT 1245+ / APPELLANT BY : MS. SHWETA MITTAL, CA %31245+ / RESPONDENT BY : SH. JAMES SINGSON, SR. DR 064', / DATE OF HEARING : 17.03.2020 78 4', / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17.03.2020 +& / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, VP THE PRESENT APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE DIFFERENT MAND I SAMITIES AGAINST THE SEPARATE IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED BY THE COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME . / ITA NOS:-8039,8040,8041,8042,8043,8044&8045/DEL/201 8 4 TAX(APPEALS) RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2016-17, 2014-15 & 2015-16 AGAINST ORDER/S PROCESSED BY DCIT-CPC. 2. THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE PRESENT APPEALS RELATE TO SEVERAL MANDI SAMITIES OPERATING FROM DIF FERENT PARTS OF UTTAR PRADESH. SHE FURTHER STATED THAT THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE DISMISSED BY THE CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME WERE FILE D AFTER CERTAIN DELAY. OUR ATTENTION WAS DRAWN TO THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AND IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS LATE BEFORE THE CIT (A) RANGE FROM 3 DAYS TO 57 DAYS. SHE FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THERE WAS REASON ABLE CAUSE IN NOT FILING THE APPEALS IN TIME AS PERSONS INCHARGE OF THE MAND I SAMITIES WERE ILLITERATE AND HENCE THE DELAY. 3. THE LEARNED DR FOR THE REVENUE OPPOSED THE SUBMI SSIONS MADE BY THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE BEEN DISMISSED IN LIMI NE BY THE CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT THERE WAS DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS L ATE BEFORE HIM. FROM THE PERUSAL OF RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS LATE RANGE FROM 3 TO 57 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED THE CAUSE FOR SUCH DELAY THAT THE PERSONS WHO WERE INCHARGE OF THE MANDI SAMITI WERE ILLITERATES AND HENCE THE APPEAL COULD NOT BE FILED IN TIME. WE FIND MERI T IN THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY WE CONDONE THE DELAY IN FI LING THE APPEALS LATE . / ITA NOS:-8039,8040,8041,8042,8043,8044&8045/DEL/201 8 5 BEFORE THE CIT(A). HOWEVER, WE RESTORE THE ISSUE BA CK TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) WHO SHALL DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERITS. 5. UNDER SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT, IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERITS WITH REASONS. ACCORDINGL Y WE DIRECT THE CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUES IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER AFFO RDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUNDS OF APPEALS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS RELATING TO DIFF ERENT ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2020. SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (SUSHMA CHOWL A) +,- /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER !' /VICE PRESIDENT / 0 DATED : 17 TH MARCH, 2020 SH +&4%/'9):+)'; COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. 12 / THE APPELLANT; 2. %312 / THE RESPONDENT; 3. < =' / THE PR. CIT 4. )>?%/'/0 / DR, ITAT, DELHI 5. ?*@6 ; GUARD FILE. +&0 / BY ORDER , 3)'%/' // TRUE COPY // ( AB-C , / ITAT, DELHI