JVR CROISSANACE INFRASTRUCTURE CO PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”: HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

For Appellant: Smt. S. Sandhya

For Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey

Hearing: 26/03/2021Pronounced: 05/04/2021

O R D E R PER BENCH: This appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2013-14 is directed against CIT(A) - 12, Hyderabad’s order dated 06/03/2019 involving proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ; in short “the Act”. 2. We notice at the outset that assessee’s instant appeal suffers from 198 days delay in filing. To this effect, the :- 2 -: JVR Croissance Infrastructure Co. Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. assessee filed condonation petition along with an affidavit affirming, inter-alia, therein that at the relevant point of time its Accountant, who was looking after income-tax matter of the assessee company was ill and ultimately passed away which caused the impugned delay in filing of the instant appeal. Case law Collector Land Acquisition vs Mst. Katiji & Ors, 1987 AIR 1353 (SC) and University of Delhi Vs. Union of India, Civil Appeal No. 9488 & 9489/2019 dated 17 December, 2019, hold that such a delay; supported by cogent reasons, deserves to be condoned so as to make way for the cause of substantial justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay of 196 days is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to the circumstances beyond its control. The same stands condoned. Case is now taken up for adjudication on merits.

At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that that the assessee has opted to avail the benefit under the ‘Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme-2020’ in prescribed Form No.1 & 2 and received Form(s)-3 in tune thereto, which is placed on record and therefore,

:- 3 -: JVR Croissance Infrastructure Co. Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. requested the Bench to permit to withdraw this appeal of the assessee.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn since the assessee has preferred to avail the Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme by filing Form No.1 & 2 and received Form(s)-3, with a rider that it shall be very much open for the assessee to file for revival of this case, if the settlement benefit under the scheme is denied to it for technical reasons.

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed in above terms. Pronounced in the open court on 5th April, 2021.

JVR CROISSANACE INFRASTRUCTURE CO PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD