Sri C.T.Sebastian, Kottayam V. ACIT, Kottayam

ITSSA 16/COCH/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8827 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-10-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 05-08-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 23-03-2007
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S C SONKAR
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL COCHIN BEN CH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI N.VIJAYAKUMARAN, JM AND SANJAY AR ORA, AM IT(SS)A NO. 16/C OCH/2007 BLOCK PERIOD : 1988-89 TO 1997-98 & FURTHER PERIO D UP TO 19.8.1998 C.T.SEBASTIAN, THOMSON GARDENS, ETTUMANOOR, KOTTAYAM. [PAN:ABOPT 0391C] VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INV.CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM. (ASSESSEE-APPELLANT) (REVENUE-RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SHRI S.C.SONKAR, CIT-DR O R D E R PER SANJAY ARORA, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE, ARISING OUT OF THE OR DER BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-IV, KOCHI (CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 1.9.2004, CONFIRMING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S. 158BFA(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 19 61 ('THE ACT' HEREINAFTER), WHICH STANDS LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER (A.O.) VIDE HIS PENALTY ORDER DATED 30.3.2001 AT RS. 5,94,774/-, I.E., AS FURTHER RECTIFIED BY HIS O RDER U/S. 154 DATED 30.9.2003. 2. THE APPEAL IS DELAYED BY A PERIOD OF 830 DAYS; BEING FILED ON 23.3.2007. THE SAME STANDS ACCOMPANIED BY A PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY DATED 22.3.2007 SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT BY THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE OF EVEN DATE . THE DELAY, HOWEVER, STANDS SINCE CODONED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 14/12/ 2007. 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT-ASSESSE E WHEN HIS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING. IN FACT, WE FIND FROM THE RECORD THAT THE SAME STOOD DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION BY THE TRIBUNAL ON AN EARLIER O CCASION, I.E., VIDE ORDER DATED 18.12.2009, OBSERVING CONTINUOUS ADJOURNMENTS AT TH E INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE PAST, THOUGH STOOD RESTORED ON AN MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATI ON BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE EFFECT THAT ITA.NO/COCH./200 2 THE NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING (15.12.20 09) WAS CAUSED BY GENUINE REASONS, VIDE ITS ORDER U/S. 254(2) DATED 4.3.2010. THE CASE STOOD ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST OF THE LD. AR VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 27.4.2010 FOR 8.9.2010 , AND THE PARTIES INFORMED ACCORDINGLY. HOWEVER, WE FIND THAT THERE HAS BEEN AGAIN NO REPRE SENTATION ON THE DATE OF HEARING AS FIXED. VIDE PARA 3 OF THE RESTORATION ORDER IT STOO D CLARIFIED BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE RECALL OF ITS ORDER IS ONLY FOR THE REASON OF NON-APPEARAN CE OF ITS COUNSEL BEING OCCASIONED BY AN INADVERTENT AND BONA FIDE MISTAKE, SO THAT THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE MAY NOT SU FFER FOR ANY MISTAKE ON THE PART OF ITS COUNSEL, AND THAT NO FUR THER ADJOURNMENT IN THE MATTER WOULD BE ALLOWED. AS CLARIFIED BY THE TRIBUNAL ON AN EARLIER OCCASION AS WELL, WITH REFERENCE TO THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. S. BHATTACHARJEE , 118 ITR 461 (SC), PREFERRING AN APPEAL MEANS MORE THAN MERE FILING IT, AND THE WORD PROSE CUTE CONNOTES EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IN APPROPRIATE PROCEEDINGS. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, W E, THEREFORE, RELYING ON THE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LIM ITED VS. CIT , 38 ITD 320 (DEL.) AND ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS. CWT, 223 ITR 480 (M.P.) DISMISS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN LIMINE . 4. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSE D IN LIMINE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. SD/- SD /- (N.VIJAYAKUMARAN) (SANJAY ARORA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: ERNAKULAM DATED: 05TH OCTOBER 2010 GJ COPY TO: 1. C.T.SEBASTIAN, THOMSON GARDENS, ETTUMANOOR, KOTT AYAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INV. C IRCLE, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-IV, KOC HI. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KOTTAYAM. 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (ASS ISTANT REGISTRAR) ITA.NO/COCH./200 3