SUKHSAGAR VYAPAAR PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR, CHHATTISGARH V. I.T.O., WARD - 8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 1439/KOL/2024

AI Insights

Sukhsagar Vyapaar Private Limited appealed against the penalty confirmed by the CIT(A) under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The penalty was initially contested due to an exparte order and significant delay in filing the appeal, which the assessee attributed to internal coordination issues after moving their office. The Tribunal, however, found the reasons for the delay insufficient, noting the absence of supporting communication or correspondence regarding the office relocation. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 32882 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1439/Kol/2024 (Assessment Year 2012-13) Sukhsagar Vyapaar Private Limited, R-44, Aishwarya Residency Telibandha, Raipur, Chattisgarh, 492001 [PAN: AAJCS5208C] ….................................. Appellant vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 8(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhavan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 ............................... Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Shri Sonjoy Chatterjee, AR Department represented by : Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT-DR Date of concluding the hearing : 19.03.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 19.03.2025 O R D E R PER BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1063515110(1) dated 28.03.2024, passed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2012-13 against the confirmation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. Shri Sonjoy Chatterjee, AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT-DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 2 ITA No. 1439/Kol/2024 Sukhsagar Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. 3. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that the order before the Ld. CIT(A) was an exparte order. It was a prayer that the matter may be kept pending, till disposal of the quantum appeal, which was pending before the Ld. CIT(A). It was then pointed out to the Ld. AR that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non-providing of the reasons for the delay of 1383 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). It was submitted by the Ld. AR that this delay was on account of lack of coordination between the staff of the assessee in so far as the assessee has shifted its registered office to Raipur. In reply, the Ld. CIT DR submitted that the reasons for the delay were supposed to be given by the assessee and the assessee has not provided the same before the Ld. CIT(A). It was prayed that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) be confirmed. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts in the present case shows that the even the appeal before the Tribunal is time barred by 32 days and the assessee has filed reasons for delay owing to disturbances caused of the Lok Sabha Elections and the closure of office due to record-breaking heat wave. We find that reasons provided by the assessee to be plausible and reasonable and consequently we condone the delay of 32 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Coming to the reasons for the delay before the Ld. CIT(A), it is noticed that the assessee has not submitted any grounds to justify condonation of delay before the Ld. CIT(A), nor have the reasons been provided before us. During the course of hearing the Ld. AR has claimed that there was lack of coordination between staff as the head office of the assessee has shifted to Raipur, from Kolkata. We find on perusal of the application for condonation filed before the Tribunal, which is dated 07.06.2024, that there is no talk of any shifting of the registered office of the assessee. A perusal of the grounds of appeal in Form No. 36 also shows the address of assessee to be at Raipur. It is clearly shows that there is no real lack of coordination as the same is not supported by any communication or correspondence. This being so and since the assessee has not provided the reasons for the delay in filing of the 3 ITA No. 1439/Kol/2024 Sukhsagar Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) calls for no interference. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 19.03.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Awashti) (George Mathan) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 19.03.2025 AK, P.S. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Sukhsagar Vyapaar Private Limited 2. Income Tax Officer,Ward 8(2), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR) //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches "