Dutta Properties, Kolkata V. ITO, WD-53(1), KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 841/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4184 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 08-08-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 09-06-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,D BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE : SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 841/KOL/2015 A.Y: 2006-07 DUTTA PROPERTIES VS. I.T.O,WARD 53(1),KOLKATA PAN: AADFD3453F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPEARANCES BY: SHRI NIRAJ SHETH, ACA, AR SHRI SALLONG YADEN, ADDL. CIT, DR DATE OF HEARING : 01-12-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01-12-2016 O R D E R SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :- THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16-01-2015 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX(APPEALS),7, KOLKATA FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 06-17. 2. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL WAS FILED WITH A DELAY OF 81 DAYS AND TO THAT EFFECT AN AFFIDAVIT FILED ST ATING THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION A RECENT DECISION ON A IDENTICAL ISSUE DECLARING THE RENTAL INCOME RECEIVE D FROM GODOWN/WAREHOUSE IS AN INCOME FROM BUSINESS OR PROF ESSION AND ON HEARING THE BOTH THE PARTIES, WE CONDONE THE DEL AY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL. 3. THE ONLY ISSUE IS TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL AS TO WHETHER THE CIT- A IS JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE CONDONATION PETITION AS FILED BEFORE HIM IN THE FAC TS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 4. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE TH AT THE CIT-A DID NOT APPRECIATE THE REASONS AS STATED IN THE DELAY C ONDONATION PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL WITH OUT CONDONING THE DELAY. HE FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE AUTHOR ISED MISS GARIMA BAID AS AN AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE TO FILE APPEAL AND PROSECUTE THE SAME. THE ASSESSEE CAME TO KNOW IN THE FIRST WEEK OF JUNE 2015 THAT SHE DID NOT FILE THE APPEAL IN TIME IN VIEW OF HER ENGAGEME NT TO SHRI DEEPAK JAIN. HE ALSO SUBMITS THAT THE SAID DELAY NEITHER WILFUL NOR INTENTIONAL AS IT WAS BEYOND THEIR CONTROL AND URGED TO REMAND THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT-A. 5. THE LD. DR HAS NOT OBJECTED TO THE PROPOSITION AS MADE BY THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIA L AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE REASONS AS STATED BY THE L D.AR AND AS DEPOSED BY WAY OF AN AFFIDAVIT DT: 02-08-2016 BY ONE OF THE PARTNERS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE APPEAL WAS NOT FILED IN TIME IN V IEW OF THE REASONS AS STATED ABOVE. WE FIND THAT THAT THE CIT-A DISMISSED THE SAID APPEAL WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SAME. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE SUBMISSIO N AS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR BEFORE US, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMAN D THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF CIT-A TO CONDONE SUCH DELAY AND DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERITS AND TO PASS AN ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE A SSESSEE SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO FILE/PRODUCE EVIDENCES, IF ANY, TO SUBST ANTIATE ITS CLAIM AND SHALL CO-OPERATE WITH THE CIT-A IN FURTHER APPELLATE PROC EEDINGS. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 01-12-2 016 SD/- SD/- M.BALAGANESH S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 01/12/ 2016 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT/ ASSESSEE: M/S. DUTTA PROPERTIES, CHHAPARIA & ASSOCIATES, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, 8 CAMAC STREET, SHANTINIKETAN BUILDING, 5 TH FLOOR, ROOM NO. 2 KOLKATA-17. 2 THE RESPONDENT/ DEPARTMENT: ITO - 53, AAYKAR BHAWAN DAKSHIN WARD 53(1), AAYKAR BHAWAN DAKS HIN, 2 GARIAHAT RD(S), KOL-68. 3 / THE CIT(A) 4.THE CIT 5 . DR, KOLKATA BENCH 6 . GUARD FILE . **PP/SPS TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, ASSTT REGISTRA R