VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRA M SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 936/JP/2018 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR :2014-15 KUMAR VIKALP, JAIPUR CUKE VS. DCIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ACDPV6557E VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PANKAJ KUMAR GARG (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI JAY SINGH (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 04/12/2018 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 06/12/2018 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-1, JAIPUR DATED 29.06.2018 FOR A.Y. 2014-15 WHEREIN TH E APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISING OUT OF ORDER PASSED BY THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR U/S 271(1)(B) OF I.T. ACT WAS DISMISSED AT THE ADMISSION STAGE AS THERE W AS DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE. 2. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PURUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. IT IS ADMITTED POSITION THAT PENALTY ORDER U/S 2 71(1)(B) WHICH WAS ISSUED ON 12.08.2016 WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAD LOST THE SAID ORDER. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE HAD MOVED AN A PPLICATION SEEKING CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER ON 25.11.2016. THEREAFTER, THE CE RTIFIED COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER WAS SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 03.05.2017 AN D THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE ITA NO. 936/JP/2018 KUMAR VIKALP, JAIPUR VS. DCIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR 2 PREFERRED THE APPEAL WITH THE LD. CIT(A) ON 19.05.2 017. IT IS THUS NOTED THAT FOR THE PERIOD STARTING 15.11.2016 TO 03.05.2017 FO R THE REASONS BASED KNOWN TO THE REVENUE, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT SUPPLIED A CER TIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER. THE ASSESSEES LETTER TO AO DATED 25.11.2016 WAS BR OUGHT TO OUR NOTICE WHEREIN WE FIND THAT THE ASSEESEE HAS REQUESTED FOR CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER. THEREFORE, IT WOULD BE REASONABLE TO EXCLUDE THE SA ID PERIOD WHILE DETERMINING THE PERIOD OF DELAY WHICH HAS HAPPENED IN FILING TH E APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AS NO FAULT LIES WITH THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, IT IS NOTED THAT ONCE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE ON 03. 05.2007, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEAL ON 19.05.2017. 4. IN LIGHT OF ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS GOT A REASONABLE BASIS FOR SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY I N FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). IN VIEW OF THE SAME AND IN THE INT EREST OF JUSTICE, WE HEREBY CONDONED THE DELAY AND THE MATTER IS SET ASIDE TO T HE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME ON MERIT AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OP PORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 06/12/2018. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 06/12/2018 * GANESH KR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- KUMAR VIKALP, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- DCIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT ITA NO. 936/JP/2018 KUMAR VIKALP, JAIPUR VS. DCIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR 3 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 936/JP/2018} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR