PANDIT VETTRIVEL, NEW DELHI V. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 (4), CHENNAI

ITA 823/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6763 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 19-12-2018
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 07-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SRIDHAR DORAJCIT
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRIN DEVANATHAN
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH: CHENNAI , , ( BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NOS.820,821,822 AND 823/CHNY/2018 /ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2002-03,2003-04,2004-05 AND 2005 -06 SHRI PANDIT VETTRIVEL , B-272, GROUND FLOOR, B-BLOCK REAR FLAT, GREATER KAILASH PART I, NEW DELHI 110 048. VS. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), CHENNAI 34. [ PAN: AJZPP 4861 G ] ( * /APPELLANT) ( +,* /RESPONDENT) * - / APPELLANT BY : SHRIN. DEVANATHAN, ADVOCATE +,* - /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SRIDHAR DORA,JCIT D.R - /DATE OF HEARING : 09.07.2019 - /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.07.2019 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THESE FOUR APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)(C )-II , CHENNAI, IN ITA NOS.820 TO 823 /CHNY/2018 :- 2 -: ITA NOS.70,71,72,90/09-10, DATED19.02.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03,2003-04,2004-05 AND 2005-06 . 2. SHRI N. DEVANATHAN REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI SRIDHAR DORA REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVE NUE. 3. THE LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT ALL THESE FOUR APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE DELAYED BY 1417 DAYS FOR WHICH ASSESSEE HAS FILED A FFIDAVITS WHEREIN ASSESSEE HAS MENTIONED THAT HE IS RESIDING IN NEW D ELHI AND ALL HIS RECORDS ARE WITH HIS PREVIOUS AUDITOR AT CHENNAI. I T IS ALSO A SUBMISSION THAT THERE WAS A SEVERE FAMILY PROBLEMS RELATED TO DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND HIS SPOUSE. IT WAS A FURTH ER SUBMISSION THAT DUE TO STRAINED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE A ND HIS WIFE, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT CO-OPERATE WITH THE REVENUE AUTH ORITIES IN THEIR RESPECTIVE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 AND 2005-06 . IT WAS PLEADED BY LD.AR THAT THE DELAY IN FILING TH ESE FOUR APPEALS MAY BE CONDONED, AND THE ISSUES RAISED IN THESE APPEALS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER F OR RE-ADJUDICATION. IT WAS A FURTHER SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE WOULD CO-OPERA TE IN THE SET-ASIDE PROCEEDINGS. 4. IN REPLY, LD.DR DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIOUS OBJEC TIONS TO CONDONE THE APPEALS FILED BELATEDLY DUE TO STRAINED RELATIONSHI P WITH HIS WIFE. LD.DR ITA NOS.820 TO 823 /CHNY/2018 :- 3 -: SUBMITTED THAT HE HAD NO OBJECTION, IF THE ISSUES I N THE APPEALS ARE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. THE LD.A.R FILED A COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TR IBUNAL IN ASSESSEES WIFE CASE, NAMELY SMT.RAJALAKSHMI VETTRI VEL, IN ITA NO.1174/CHNY/2017, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 DATED 31.12.2018 WHEREIN THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL HAD CONDONED THE DELAY OF 752 DAYS. FURTHER, LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES WI FE CASE REFERRED TO SUPRA HELD THAT THE ASSESSEES WIFE HAD FACED GENUI NE HARDSHIPS, AND IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE ASSESSEES WIFE APPEAL WAS LIABLE TO RESTORE TO THE FILE OF LD.ASSE SSING OFFICER FOR RE- ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING ASSESSEE THEREIN ADEQUA TE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE HER CASE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. A PERUSAL OF THE AFFIDAVITS FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY SO RECEIVED. THE ASSESSEE HAS VALID AND JUSTIFIABLE REASONS FOR DELAY IN FILING OF THESE APPEALS. CONS EQUENTLY, THE DELAY IN FILING OF THESE FOUR APPEALS IS CONDONED AND THE AP PEALS ARE DISPOSED OF ON MERIT. A PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEARS SHOW THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PRODU CE EVIDENCE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, OR THE LD.CIT(A) TO SUBSTANT IATE HIS CASE. THIS BEING SO, IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ISSUES IN THESE FOUR APPEALS ARE ITA NOS.820 TO 823 /CHNY/2018 :- 4 -: RESTORED TO THE FILE LD.ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-AD JUDICATION AFTER GRANTING ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO BEING HEARD. 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE FOUR APPEALS OF THE ASSE SSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 AND 2005-06 ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSIO N OF HEARING ON THE 09 TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( INTURI RAMA RAO ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED: 09 TH JULY, 2019. K S SUNDARAM - +56 76 /COPY TO: 1. * /APPELLANT 4. 8 /CIT 2. +,* /RESPONDENT 5. 6 + /DR 3. 8 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF