SHRI VIKAS KOTHARI, CHENNAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD-6(4), CHENNAI

ITA 986/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6782 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 30-12-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R ANITA
• Assessee Lawyers: D ANAND
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . , . , BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.986/CHNY/2020 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15 SHRI VIKAS KOTHARI, NO. 9, VAIKUNDA VADHIYAR STREET, SOWCARPET, CHENNAI 600 079. [ PAN: ALRPK2143E] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD 6(4), CHENNAI. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI D. ANAND, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : MS. R. ANITA, ADDL. CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 01.09.2021 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.09.2021 / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 5, CHENNAI, DATED 22.03.2018 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS ORIGINALLY FILED A PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 954 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. SUBSEQUENTLY, IT IS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF BENCH THAT THE LD. CIT(A)-5, CHENNAI HAD MADE A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR IN MENTIONING THE DATE OF ORDER AS 22.03.2018 AS AGAINST THE ACTUAL DATE OF ORDER I.E., 22.03.2019, WHICH WAS RECTIFIED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-5, CHENNAI ON I.T.A. NO. 986/CHNY/2020 2 10.04.2019 ON A PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSEE HAS RECTIFIED THE ORIGINAL DELAY PETITION AND FILED A RECTIFIED DELAY CONDONATION PETITION FOR 578 DAYS. THE DELAY BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AS PER THE RECTIFIED PETITION IS FOR 578 DAYS. 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED DECLARATION UNDER THE VIVAD-SE-VISHWAS SCHEME 2020 AND ALSO RECEIVED FORM NO.3 AND ACCORDINGLY TAX HAS ALREADY BEEN PAID AND FORM NO. 4 HAS ALREADY SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE DELAY IS NOT CONDONED BY THE ITAT, THE DEPARTMENT IS REFUSING TO ACCEPT HIS CASE UNDER THE SCHEME AND PRAYED THAT THE DELAY MAY BE CONDONED AND APPEAL IS ADMITTED. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR STRONGLY OPPOSED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THE AFFIDAVIT, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED FOLLOWING REASONS FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY AND RELEVANT PORTION IS EXTRACTED AS UNDER: 1. I AM THE PETITIONER IN THE ABOVE APPEAL AND I AM FULLY ACQUAINTED WITH THE FACTS OF THE CASE LEADING TO AND RELATING TO THE PRESENT PETITION. 2. I HAVE FILED THE ABOVE APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-5, CHENNAI DATED 22.03.2019. THE SAID ORDER WAS RECEIVED BY ME ON 3.04.2019 BUT HOWEVER A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR I.T.A. NO. 986/CHNY/2020 3 CREPT INTO THE ORDER IN WHICH THE DATE OF ORDER WAS WRONGLY MENTIONED AS 22.03.2018 AS AGAINST THE ACTUAL DATE WHICH WAS 22.03.2019. SUBSEQUENTLY ON A RECTIFICATION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER THE DATE OF THE ORDER WAS RECTIFIED AS 22.03.2019. 3. I SUBMIT THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-5, CHENNAI DATED 22.03.2019 (RECTIFIED BY CIT(A) ORDER DATED 10.04.2019) WAS RECEIVED BY ME ON 03.04.2019. I SUBMIT THAT ON RECEIPT OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITIES ORDER I CONTACTED MY COUNSEL TO SEEK PROFESSIONAL ADVICE ON FUTURE COURSE OF ACTION. I WAS THEREAFTER ADVISED BY MY COUNSEL TO PREFER A SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITAT. IN THE MEANWHILE, WHILE I WAS COMPILING THE APPEAL PAPERS SUCH AS ASSESSMENT ORDER, COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) ORDER AND FORM 35 AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) I SEEM TO HAVE MISPLACED THE CIT(A) ORDER VIZ THE IMPUGNED ORDER UNDER APPEAL, AS THE SAME HAD GOT MIXED UP WITH OTHER PAPERS. 4. I SUBMIT THAT WAS ABLE TO TRACE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ORDER ONLY DURING THE FIRST WEEK OF DECEMBER 2020. THEREAFTER, I CONTACTED MY COUNSEL FOR PREPARATION OF SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL AND FILED THE SAME BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ON 31.12.2020 WITH A DELAY OF 578 DAYS. 5. I SUBMIT THAT ORIGINALLY THE PETITIONER HAD FILED A CONDONE DELAY PETITION TOGETHER WITH APPEAL FILING BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL ON 31.12.2020 MENTIONING THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF CIT(A) ORDER AS 22.03.2018 AS AGAINST THE ACTUAL DATE OF 22.03.2019 AND PRAYED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 954 DAYS. SUBSEQUENTLY IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF MY COUNSEL THAT THE DATE OF ORDER IS 22.03.2019 AND THAT THE SAME WAS RECEIVED BY ME ON 3.04.2019. HENCE THIS PRESENT PETITION IS FILED TO CONDONE THE DELAY OF 578 DAYS. I SUBMIT THAT THE SAID APPEAL WAS FILED ON 3L.12.2020 WITH A DELAY OF 578 DAYS. 6. I HUMBLY SUBMIT THAT I WAS UNABLE TO FILE THE APPEAL PAPERS IN DUE TIME DESPITE BEST OF MY EFFORTS BUT HOWEVER FILED THE SAME WITH A DELAY OF 578 DAYS. THE DELAY IS NEITHER WILLFUL NOR WANTON BUT DUE TO THE AFORESAID CIRCUMSTANCE. HENCE THERE WAS A DELAY OF 578 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. 7. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL MAY BE PLEASED TO CONDONE THE DELAY OF 578 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND RENDER JUSTICE. I.T.A. NO. 986/CHNY/2020 4 6. BY CONSIDERING THE ABOVE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO CONDONE THE DELAY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DELAY IS CONDONED AND APPEAL IS ADMITTED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 08 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (G. MANJUNATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL M EMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 08.09.2021 VM/- /COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT, 2. / RESPONDENT, 3. ( ) /CIT(A), 4. /CIT, 5. /DR & 6. /GF.