ITO, WD-5(3), KOLKATA, Kolkata V. M/s Edward Supply Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITSSA 65/KOL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2832 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 01-04-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S JHAJHARIA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IT(SS)A.NO.65/KOL/2015-M/S. EDWARD SUPPLY PVT. LTD. A.Y.2005-06 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI P.M.JAGTAP, AM & SRI N.V.VA SUDEVAN, JM ] I.T.(SS)A.NO.65/KOL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 I.T.O., WARD-5(3) -VS.- M/S. EDWARD SUPP LY PVT. LTD. KOLKATA KOLKATA [PAN : AAACE 5578J] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE (ADJOURNMENT APPLICA TION) FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI S.JHAJHARIA, FCA DATE OF HEARING : 01.12.2016. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2.12.2016. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08.01.2015 OF CIT(A)- 21, KOLKATA RELATING TO A.Y.2005-06. 2. GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE READ AS FOLLOWS :- THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE CIT(A) ERRED ON FACTS AS WELL AS IN LAW IN CONDONED THE DELAY IN FI LING OF APPEAL BEFORE HIM WITHOUT ANY VALID REASONS WHICH LEAD TO EXCESS INTEREST ALLOWED ON REFUND UP TO THE DATE OF APPEAL EFFECT. 3. THE PRESENT APPEAL ARISES OUT OF THE ACTION OF A O WHILE GIVING EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF CIT(A) U/S 251/143(3)/153A OF THE I NCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (ACT). THE ORDER GIVING EFFECT WAS PASSED BY T HE AO ON 07.09.2012. AGAINST THE AFORESAID ORDER GIVING EFFE CT, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A). THE APPEAL OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN FILED ON OR BEFORE 12.07.2013 I.E. 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF SERVICE OF THE RELEVANT NOTICE OF DEMAND WHICH WAS SERVED ON THE A SSESSEE ON 12.06.2013. THE ASSESSEE HOWEVER FILED THE APPEAL O N 19.11.2013 AND AN IT(SS)A.NO.65/KOL/2015-M/S. EDWARD SUPPLY PVT. LTD. A.Y.2005-06 2 APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY WAS FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE BEFORE CIT(A). 4. THE CIT(A) CONSIDERED THE REASONS FOR THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AS FOLLOWS :- ALONG WITH THE FORM NO.35, THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASS ESSEE COMPANY FILED AN APPLLICATION FOR CONDONAITON OF DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL. IT IS SUBMITTED BY HIM THAT THE RELEVATN ORDER WAS RECEIV ED BY THE PERSON CONCERNED, SHRI RAM SARUP SINGH ON 12.06.2013 AND T HE APPEAL WAS TO BE FILED BY 12.07.2013. HOWEVER, THE SAID PERSON DID N OT COMMUNICATE THE SAME TO THE DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANY AS SOON AFTER THE RECEIPT OF ORDER HE TRAVELLED OUT OF STATION FOR URGENT AND IMPORTANT O FFICIAL WORK AND FORGOT TO INFORM THE DIRECTORS ABOUT THE RECEIPT OF SAID O RDER U/S 251/143(3)/153A WITHIN TIME FOR FILING THE APPEAL. THAT PERSON INTIMATED AND SHOWED THE SAID ORDER TO THE DIRECTORS ONLY ON 24.10.2013. BUT, UNFORTUNATELY BY THAT TIME 30 DAYS PERIOD OF LIMITA TION HAD EXPIRED. THE DIRECTORS TOOK IMMEDIATE ACTION IN PREPARING THE AP PEAL PAPERS AND THE APPEAL COULD BE FILED ON 19.11.2013. IT IS SUBMITTE D BY THE APPELLANT THAT THE DELAY IN ILING OF APPEAL WAS ONLY DUE TO INADVE RTENCE AND REASONABLE CAUSE. THERE WAS NO INTENTION TO FILE THE APPEAL BE LATEDLY AND, THEREFORE, THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL MAY BE CONDONED AND T HE APPEAL BE ADMITTED. 3.1 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE AS SESSEE STATING REASONS FOR DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL. I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL WAS DUE TO REASONABLE CAUSE AND IT WAS NOT INTENTIONAL. T EREFORE, THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL IS CONDONED AND THE APPEAL IS ADMITTED. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN COND ONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL THE REVENUE HAS PREFERRED THE PRE SENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6. THE LD. DR FILED AN APPLICATION FOR AN ADJO URNMENT. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT AGAINST THE VERY SAME IMPUGED ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAD PREFE RRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND IN SUCH APPEAL THE TRIBUNAL HAD REMANDED THE ISSUE TO CIT(A) FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. TAKING NOT E OF THE SUBMISSION, WE REJECTED THE REQUEST FOR GRANT OF ADJOURNMENT AN D PROCEEDED TO HEAR THE APPEAL. THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS IT(SS)A.NO.65/KOL/2015-M/S. EDWARD SUPPLY PVT. LTD. A.Y.2005-06 3 THAT THE CIT(A) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE RIGHTLY CONDONED THE DELAY IN FILING APPEAL. THE LD. COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE THE DELAY WAS RIG HTLY CONDONED BY CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. IN OUR VIEW THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN C ONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE CIT(A) IS JUST AND PROPER AND CALLS FOR NO INTERFERENCE. THE LAW IS WELL SETTLED THAT SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE SHOULD PREVAIL OVER TECHNCIAL CONSIDERATIONS. A LIT IGANT DOES NOT STAND TO BENEFIT BY FILING THE APPEAL LATE. THE REQUIREMENT OF LAW THAT EACH DAY DELAY MUST BE EXPLAINED DOES NOT MEAN THAT A PADENT IC APPROACH MUST BE TAKEN. THE DOCTRINE MUST BE APPLIED IN A RATIONAL C OMMON SENSE AND PRAGMATIC MANNER. THE ABOVE PROPOSITION EMERGES FRO M A READING OF THE VARIOUS DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF COLLECTOR OF LAND ACQUISITION MST KATIGI AND OTHERS 167 ITR 4 71, INDIAN INSURANCE COMPANY VS SMT. NIRMALA DEVI 118 ITR 507, CIT VS WEST BENGAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCE CORPO RAITON LTD. 334 ITR 269. NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN BROUGHT BY THE AO IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE CIT(A) TO DISPUTE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF THIS PLEA OF REASONABLE CAUSE IN FILING THE APPEAL BELATEDLY. WE THEREFORE FIND NO MERIT IN THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS DISMISSED. IT(SS)A.NO.65/KOL/2015-M/S. EDWARD SUPPLY PVT. LTD. A.Y.2005-06 4 8. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS D ISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.12.2016 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 02.12.2016. SD/- SD/- [P.M.JAGTAP] [ N.V.VASUDEVAN ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 02.12.2016. [RG PS] COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1.M/S. EDWARD SUPPLY PVT. LTD., 9/12, LAL BAZAR STR EET, 2 ND FLOOR, BLOCK-I, KOLKATA- 700001. 2. I.T.O., WARD-5(3), KOLKATA. 3. C.I.T.(A)-21, KOLKATA. 4. CIT-2, KOLKA TA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT.REGISTRAR, KOLKATA BENCHES