Kalpna Mukesh Doshi, New Delhi V. ITO, Ward-50(3), New Delhi

ITA 9826/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6965 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 27-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Period of limitation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) ITA NO.9826 TO 9829/DEL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 TO 2016-17 KALPANA MUKESH DOSHI 5, 2 ND FLOOR, VISHWA APARTMENTS, MELTCALE ROAD, SHANKARACHARYA MARG, NEW DELHI -110054 PAN NO. AACPD8372J VS ITO WARD- 50 (3) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. HITESH AMBANI, CA MS. SRISHTI GUPTA, CA RESPONDENT BY MS. SUNITA SINGH, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING: 07/09/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 07/09/2021 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE PREFERRED AGAINST THE FOUR SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A), DELHI-42 DATED 31.10.2019 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2012-13,2013-14,2014-15 AND 2016 -17. 2 2. SINCE COMMON GRIEVANCE IS INVOLVED IN ALL THESE APPEALS, THEY WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVIT Y. 3. THE COMMON GRIEVANCE WHICH NEEDS TO BE ADJUDICAT ED RELATES TO THE DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL BY THE CIT(A ) WITHOUT CONDONING THE DELAY. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A ) WE FIND THAT ACCORDING TO THE CIT(A) THERE WAS A DELAY IN F ILING THE APPEALS WHEREAS ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE THE APPEALS WERE FILED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION. 5. HOWEVER, THE CIT(A) WAS OF THE FIRM BELIEF THAT THERE WAS A DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS AND THE ASSESSEE HAS NO T SOUGHT CONDONATION FOR DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL HENCE, TH E APPEAL WAS DISMISSED. 6. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT EVEN IF THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION IN RESPECT OF THE SERVICE OF THE ASSESSME NT ORDER BETWEEN THE CIT(A) AND THE ASSESSEE, THE CIT(A) OUG HT TO HAVE DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERITS OF THE CASE AS THE ALL EGED DELAY IS VERY MINISCULE. 7. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY WE REST ORE THE CAPTIONED APPEALS TO THE FILES OF THE CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE IS 3 DIRECTED TO FILE AFFIDAVIT REQUESTING THE CONDONATI ON OF DELAY, IF ANY, AND THE CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE APPEA L AFRESH AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF B EING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEALS ARE T REATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 9. DECISION ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRES ENCE OF BOTH THE REPRESENTATIVES ON 07.09.2021. SD/- SD/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCO UNTANT MEMBER *NEHA* DATE:-07.09.2021 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGI STRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 4 DATE OF DICTATION 07.09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 07.09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER 07.09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 07.09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 07.09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/ PS 07.09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT 07.09.2021 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 07.09.2021 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. THE DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER