Sh. Sangeet Singh Som, Ghaziabad V. ITO, Ghaziabad

ITA 82/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6924 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 12-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 06-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC-2: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI P.K.BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.:- 82/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 SANGEET SINGH SOM KA-64, KAUSHAMBI GHAZIABAD PAN ATQPS6714A VS. ITO WARD-2 (3) GHAZIABAD. (APPELLA NT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSE E AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DATED 25.9.2014. 2. THE FIRST GROUND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE RELATES T O NOT CONDONING THE DELAY BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND THEREFORE NOT ADMIT TING THE DELAY OF THE ASSESEE AS BARRED BY LIMITATION. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFU LLY CONSIDERED THE SAME. I NOTED THAT THE ASSESSSEE HAS FILED THE APPE AL IN THIS CASE BEFORE ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJEEV AHUJA, CA DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI SANDEEP KUMAR MISHRA SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 12 /07 /2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 14 /07 /2016 ITA NO. 82/DEL/2015 2 THE LD. CIT(A) NOT WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME. THE APPEAL WAS FILED LATE AND FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF THE DELAY ALONGWITH THE APPEAL DATED 25.3.2014. IN THE CONDONATION APPLICATION THE ASSESSEE HAS CLEARLY STATED THAT TH E APPEAL WAS TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 25.3.2014 WHILE THE SAME W AS TO BE FILED ON 29 TH JANUARY, 2011. THE ASSESEE HAS GIVEN THE REASON TH AT IN THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED THE AO MADE THE PROTECTIVE AD DITION AND SUBSTANTIVE ADDITION WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF REAL BENEFICIARY AND AT THAT TIME THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ADVISED THE ASSESSEE NOT TO FILE THE APPEAL. THE ASSESEE HAD DULY DEPOSITED THE DUE TAX ON THE ADDITION MADE ON SUBSTANTIVE BASIS. SUBSEQUENTLY THE AO CHAN GED THE PROTECTIVE ADDITION TO SUBSTANTIVE ADDITION WHICH WERE NEVER I NTIMATED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE CAME TO KNOW ONLY WHEN TH E NOTICE WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESEE WITHOUT AN Y DELAY FILED THE APPEAL. IN MY VIEW THE REASONS FOR THE CONDONATION OF THE DELAY TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE. FOR THE MIST AKE OF THE COUNSEL, ASSESSEE CANNOT BE PENALISED. I THEREFORE CONDONE THE DELAY IN RESPECT OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND SET A SIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). THEREFORE THE APPEAL IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION THAT THE LD. CIT(A) SHALL DECIDE T HE APPEAL OF THE ITA NO. 82/DEL/2015 3 ASSESSEE AFRESH ON MERIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFT ER GIVING PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS S TATISTICALLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14/07/201 6. SD/- (P.K. BANSAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 14/07/2016 *VEENA* COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI