Salem Pipes, Salem V. ITO, Salem

ITA 892/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 89221714 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 22-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P RADHAKRISHNAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !' , $ % BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.892/MDS/2015 ' (' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 M/S SALEM PIPES, 90(83) C.V. MARKET ROAD, SALEM 636 001. PAN : AAEFS 6836 L V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(1), SALEM. (*+/ APPELLANT) (,-*+/ RESPONDENT) *+ . / / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE ,-*+ . / / RESPONDENT BY : SH. P. RADHAKRISHNAN, JCIT 0 . 1$ / DATE OF HEARING : 11.06.2015 2!( . 1$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.07.2015 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), SALEM AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2 I.T.A. NO.892/MDS/15 2. SHRI S. SRIDHAR, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) DISMISSED THE APPEAL FOR NON- PROSECUTION. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE CIT(APPEALS) OUGH T TO HAVE DISPOSED THE SAME ON MERIT. THE LD.COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS A DELAY OF 72 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL. SINCE THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE DELAY MAY BE CONDONED AND ON ADMISSION, IT MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE O F THE CIT(APPEALS) FOR CONSIDERATION ON MERIT. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIV E ALSO. IN FACT, THERE IS A DELAY OF 72 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. FROM THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, IT APPEARS THAT IM MEDIATELY ON RECEIVING THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS), THE SAME W AS HANDED OVER BY THE ASSESSEE TO ITS CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT FOR FIL ING THE APPEAL. HOWEVER, THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT FAILED TO FILE TH E APPEAL. IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSID ERED OPINION THAT THERE WAS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE APP EAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL BEFORE THE DUE DATE. ACCORDINGLY, THE DEL AY IN FILING THE APPEAL IS CONDONED AND THE APPEAL IS ADMITTED. 4. NOW COMING TO THE MERIT OF THE APPEAL, AS RIGHTL Y POINTED OUT BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED BY 3 I.T.A. NO.892/MDS/15 THE CIT(APPEALS) FOR NON-PROSECUTION. THE CIT(APPE ALS), BEING THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS EXPECTED TO DISPOSE TH E APPEAL ON MERIT. THE CIT(APPEALS) BEING A SENIOR-MOST AND EXPERIENCE D OFFICER OF THE DEPARTMENT, AND WELL VERSED IN INCOME-TAX MATTE RS, IS EXPECTED TO DISPOSE THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. MERELY BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APP EAR BEFORE HIM, IT WILL NOT EMPOWER THE CIT(APPEALS) TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON- PROSECUTION. BY GIVING ONE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSE SSEE AND DISPOSING THE APPEAL ON MERIT WOULD NOT PREJUDICE T HE INTERESTS OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE IS REMITTED BACK TO HIS FILE FOR RECONSIDERATION. THE CIT(APPEALS) SHALL DISPOSE TH E APPEAL ON MERIT AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE AS SESSEE. IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IF THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT COOPERATE WITH CIT(APPEALS) AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY, IT IS OPEN TO THE CIT(APPEALS) TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT ON T HE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 5. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE APPEAL OF THE AS SESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4 I.T.A. NO.892/MDS/15 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 3 RD JULY, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !' ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 3 RD JULY, 2015. KRI. . ,156 76(1 /COPY TO: 1. *+ /APPELLANT 2. ,-*+ /RESPONDENT 3. 0 81 () /CIT(A), SALEM 4. 0 81 /CIT, SALEM 5. 69 ,1 /DR 6. :' ; /GF.