Sh. Chatter Singh, Yamunanagar V. ITO, Yamunanagar

ITA 91/CHANDI/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 77116 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-06-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 02-06-2014
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 24-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHOK KHANNA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.91/CHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 SH.CHATTER SINGH, VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, VPO BILASPUR, WARD-3, YAMUNANAGAR. YAMUNANAGAR PAN: AKNPS7393B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ROHIT GOEL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ASHOK KHANNA, DR DATE OF HEARING : 02.06.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.06.2014 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J.M. : THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORD ER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), KARNAL DATED 29.10.2010 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF IN COME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS VIDE GROUND NO.1 WHICH READS AS UNDER: 1. THAT LEARNED CITA HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN NOT CONDONING THE DELAY OF 370 DAYS IN FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE CIT A AND AS SUCH NOT DECIDING THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CI T (APPEALS) IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL IN LIMINE AS THE APPEAL WAS F ILED BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS) AFTER A DELAY OF 370 DAYS. 2 4. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT TH AT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE IN NOT F ILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS) THOUGH THE APPEAL FEE WAS PAID IN TIME. FURTHER CONTENTIONS WERE RAISED BY THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD. 5. THE LEARNED D.R. FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEALS). 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS) IN THE PRESENT CASE WAS FILED AFTER A DELAY OF 370 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US HAD MOVED APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS) WHICH READS AS UNDER: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYKAR BHAVAN, SECTOR 2, PANCHKULA (HARVANA) HON'BLE SIR, RE: REQUEST FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL IN THE CASE OF CHATTER SINGH - ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005- 06. WITH REFERENCE TO THE ABOVE; IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUB MITTED AS UNDER: 1. THAT IN THE ABOVE CASE; THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) W AS FRAMED BY THE ITO, WARD-3, YAMUNA NAGAR AGAINST WHICH ORDER THE ASSESS EES HAS CHOSEN TO PREFER AN APPEAL WITH YOUR GOODSELF. 2. THAT THE DATE OF SERVICE OF ORDER WAS 31.12.2007. 3. THAT THE UNDERSIGNED COULD NOT FILE THE APPEAL IN T IME DUE TO OVERSIGHT. AN AFFIDAVIT TO THIS EFFECT IS BEING SUBMITTED ALONGWI TH. KEEPING IN VIEW THE ABOVE REASONS; THE DELAY IN FIL ING OF APPEAL MAY KINDLY BE CONDONED AND APPEAL BE ACCEPTED FOR HEARING. THANKING YOU, YOURS FAITHFULLY, (CA. VIPIN GUPTA) AR OF THE ASSESSEE END.: AFFIDAVIT. 3 7. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED AN AFFIDAVIT OF CHAR TERED ACCOUNTANT SHRI VIPIN GUPTA WHICH READS AS UNDER\; AFFIDAVIT I, CA-VIPIN GUPTA S/O LATE SH. S.C GUPTA, PARTNER M /S GUPTA & MALHOTRA, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS RESIDENT OF 14, RAGHUNATH PURI YAMUNA N AGAR, DO HEREBY SOLEMNLY AFFIRM & DECLARE AS UNDER: 1. THAT I WAS DEALING WITH INCOME TAX CASES OF SH. CHA TTER SINGH (AKNPS7393B) FOR THE AY 2005-06 AT ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS STAGES U/S 143(3) AND ALSO APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE CITA. 2. THAT ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S, 143(3) FOR AY 05-06 WAS RECEIVED BY ASSESSEE ON 31.12.2007 AND AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF LAW AN APPEAL IS TO BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 31.1.2008. THAT ON 28.1.2008 I HAD PREPARED THE APPEAL TO BE FILED IN THIS CASE FOR AY 2005-06 AND APPEAL FILING OF RS.1000/- WAS DEPOSITED IN BANK BY THE ASSESSEE AND APPEAL WAS ALSO SIGNED BY CHHATTER SINGH AND HANDED OVER TO ME AFTE R SIGNATURES. THAT ON 28.1.2008 THE COMPLETE SET TO BE FILED WAS READY IN MY OFFICE TO BE DISPATCHED TO THE OFFICE OF CIT(A) PANCHKULLA. 3. THAT BY MISTAKE THE COMPLETE SET WAS TAGGED IN MY O FFICE FILE OF ASSESSEE IN PLACE OF DISPATCH AND WHEN THE MISTAKE WAS REALIZED IN THE M ONTH OF FEBURARY 2009 THE APPEAL WAS FILED TO CITA ON 5.2.2009. 4. THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL BEFORE CITA IN THE CA SE OF CHATTER SINGH WAS DUE TO MISTAKE ON MY PART WHICH IS DEEPLY REGRETTED. 8. THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE ARISING IN THE PRESENT APP EAL IS IN RELATION TO THE SAID CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 370 DA YS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS). THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE HAD RECEIVED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 31.12.2007 AND THE APPEAL WAS DUE TO BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 31.1.20 08. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE COUNSEL LOOKING AFTER THE APPEAL MATTER HAD PREPARED THE APPEAL AND THE APPEAL FEE OF RS.1000/- WAS DEPOSITED ON 28.1.2008 AND EVEN THE APPEAL PAPERS WERE SIGNED AND HANDED OVER TO THE COUNSEL. HOWEVER, THE COUNSEL BY MISTA KE PLACED HE SAID PAPERS IN THE OFFICE FILE OF THE ASSESSEE INST EAD OF DISPATCHING THE SAME. THE MISTAKE WAS REALIZED IN THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 2009 AND THE APPEAL WAS FILED ON 5.2.2009 IN THE OFFICE OF THE CIT 4 (APPEALS). THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTA NT SHRI VIPIN GUPTA HAD BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. 9. IN THE ENTIRETY OF THE ABOVE SAID FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCHARGED HIS ONUS OF PAYIN G THE APPEAL FEE IN TIME AND ALSO CLAIMED TO HAVE SIGNED THE MEMO OF APPEAL IN TIME, THE DELAY CAUSED BECAUSE OF THE MISTAKE OF TH E COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IN NOT FILING THE APPEAL IN TIME, CANNOT B E ATTRIBUTED TO THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW THEREOF, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PREVENTED FROM REASONABLE CAUSE IN NOT FILING THE A PPEAL IN TIME BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. ACCEPTING THE CONTENTION OF THE ASS ESSEE IN THIS REGARD WE CONDONE THE DELAY OF 370 DAYS IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS). HOWEVER, WE REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF HE CIT (APPEALS) TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE RAISED ON MERITS AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 6 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2014. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 6 TH JUNE, 2014 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5