Nilofer Mehboob Mujawar, Solapur V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), Solapur

ITA 890/PUN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2037 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, PUNE (THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, VP AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY , JM . / I TA NO S . 890, 891 & 892 /PUN/20 18 / ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05 & 2005 - 06 NILOFER MEHBOOB MUJAWAR, FLAT NO.4, GREEN LAND APARTMENT, SOUTH SADAR BAZAR, SOLAPUR - 413 003 PAN : AOIPM9211F ....... / APPELLANT / V/S. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2), SOLAPUR. / RESPONDENT A SSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI SUDHENDU DAS / DATE OF HEARING : 29 .06 .2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 . 0 6 .2021 / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHU RY, JM : THESE THREE APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE COMMON ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM THE DIFFERENT ORDER S OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) - 9, PUNE DATED 31.01.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05 AND 2005 - 06 AS PER THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON RECORD. 2 ITA NO S . 890 TO 892 /PUN/20 18 A.Y S . 2003 - 04 TO 2005 - 06 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, WE FIND THAT THE APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 4 DAYS. HOWEVER, THIS DELAY HAS BEEN EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF FILING OF APPEAL THROUGH CONDONATION PETITION STATING THAT THIS DELAY WAS OCCURRED DUE TO ILL HEALTH . THE LD. DR D ID NOT RAISE OBJECTION IF THE DELAY IS CONDONED AND THE CASE IS HEARD ON MERITS. THAT ON PERUSAL OF THE CONDONATION PETITION REGARDING THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE DELAY CANNOT BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE DELIBERATE ACTION OF THE ASSE SSEE OR ANY MALA - FIDE INTENTION ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ENTIRE DELAY IS EXPLAINED WHICH IS NOT DISPUTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. IN SUCH SCEN ARIO, WE CONDONE THIS DELAY OF 4 DAYS AND A FTER RECORDING T HE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR, THE CASE S WERE HEARD ON MERITS. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE WAS PRESENT. WE OBSERVE THAT THE ORDER S PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A PPEALS ) ARE AN EX - PARTE ORDER S AND RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES OF THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT ADJUDICATED UPO N. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DISMISSED THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND OF NON - PROSECUTION. 4 . FROM P ARA 4 & 5 OF THE LD. CIT(A PPEALS ) S ORDERS, IT IS EVIDENT THAT NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDED AND FILED THE DETAILS EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL S ON MERITS. THEREFORE, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 5 . WE HAVE PER USED THE CASE RECORDS . WE FIND THAT TH E LD. CIT(APPEALS) DISMISSED AP PEAL S OF TH E ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND OF NON - PROSECUTION. IT IS, THEREFORE, CLEAR THAT RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES OF THE PARTIES WERE NOT ADJUDICATED UPON ON MERITS. THE SPIRIT OF INCOME TAX LEGISLATION IS THAT OF WELFARE LEGISLATION AND WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT ONE FINAL OPPORTUNITY NEEDS 3 ITA NO S . 890 TO 892 /PUN/20 18 A.Y S . 2003 - 04 TO 2005 - 06 TO BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT HIS CASE ON MERITS SO THAT JUSTICE CAN BE DELIVERED. IN VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE SET ASIDE THE RESPECTIVE ORDER S OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) AN D RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THEIR RESPECTIVE FILE S FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. AT THE SAME TIME, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT HIMSELF BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WITH RELEVANT DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES TO REPRESENT HIS CASE ON MERITS. 6 . IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRO NOUNCED ON 29 TH DAY OF JUNE , 20 2 1 . S D/ - S D/ - R.S.SYAL PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE; / DATED : 29 TH JUNE , 202 1 . SB / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT. 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS) - 9, PUNE. 4. THE PR. CIT - 6, PUNE. 5. , , , / DR, ITAT, B BENCH, PUNE. 6 . / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, // T RUE C OPY // / PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE . 4 ITA NO S . 890 TO 892 /PUN/20 18 A.Y S . 2003 - 04 TO 2005 - 06 DATE 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 29.06 .2021 SR.PS/PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 29.06 .202 1 SR.PS/PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED AND PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER AM/JM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS SR.PS/PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS/PS 7 DATE OF UPLOADING OF ORDER SR.PS/PS 8 FILE SENT TO BENCH CLERK SR.PS/PS 9 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 10 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE A.R 11 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER