VENKAT REDDY RAJIDI,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-7, HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1526/HYD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 January 2021AY 2005-064 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Subsequently, the Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as requested, given their decision to opt for the 'Vivad Se Viswas' scheme.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 31 days due to an administrative error by their counsel's clerk. The assessee later opted to avail the 'Vivad Se Viswas' scheme and requested to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the assessee should be allowed to withdraw the appeal to avail a tax amnesty scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD

Before: SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

For Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Hearing: 06/01/2021Pronounced: 08/01/2021

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year:2005-06 R. Venkat Reddy, Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Prop. M/s. Sairam Graphics, Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Cicle-7, PAN: AGSOR 4474 P Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: B. Satyanarayana Murthy Revenue by: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR Date of hearing: 06/01/2021 Date of pronouncement: 08/01/2021 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT (A)-1, Guntur in appeal No. 973/CIT(A)-1/GNT/2010-11, dated 11- 05-2017 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 153C and U/s. 250(6) of the Act for the A.Y.: 2005-06.

2.

At the outset, it is observed from the record that there is a delay of 31 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. In this regard, the assessee’s Counsel had submitted an affidavit seeking condonation of delay wherein the reasons for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit was explained. For reference, the relevant portion from the affidavit is extracted herein below:-

“I am the partner for M/s. Venugopal & Chenoy and I am conversant the facts of the case relating to appeal filed by Sri R. Venkat Reddy for the Assessment Year 2005-06 before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals-1 Guntur disposed off the appeal of Sri R. Venkat Reddy for the A.Y. 2005-06 through order 11/5/2017. This order is received by the appellant on 1/6/2017 in our appeals Register. The date of receipt is correctly mentioned as 1/6/2017 but the due date is mentioned by the concerned clerk as 29/08/2017. Normally, the due date is written in the Register as the date which is 2-3 days in advance with reference to the correct due date. As order received on 1/6/2017 the due date is 31st. The correct date is taken as 31/8/2017 and the appeal was filed on that date. However, the correct due date is 31/7/2017 not 31/8/2017 that there is a delay of 31 days in filing the appeal. The delay of 31 days on account of commission in our office by the concerned clerk.”

3.

On perusal of the affidavit filed by the assessee’s Counsel explaining the reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, We are of the view that the delay was caused due to the mistake of the clerk at assessee’s Counsel’s office and the same is not attributable to the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, We hereby condone the delay of 31days in the filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to hear the appeal on merits.

4.

At the outset, Ld.AR submitted before us that the assessee desires to withdraw his appeal as the assessee has opted to avail ‘Vivad Se Viswas’ scheme. He further submitted that the assessee had filed Form No.1 & 2 and is awaiting to receive Form-3 from the Revenue. It was therefore pleaded, that the appeal of the assessee may be allowed to be withdrawn.

5.

The Ld. DR conceded to the request of the Ld.AR.

6.

Having heard both the parties through video conference, We are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee to be withdrawn yielding to the prayer of the Ld. AR as the assessee has preferred to avail the Vivad- se-Vishwas Scheme by filing Form No.1 & 2. The Ld. DR has also conceded to the request of the Ld. AR. Accordingly, We hereby dismiss the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn. However, we also make it clear that, if the assessee’s case is not accepted in the Vivad-Se-Viswas scheme by the Revenue for whatsoever may be the reason, then the assessee shall be at liberty to file a Miscellaneous Petition before the Tribunal within the time limit prescribed under the Act to reinstate the appeal. It is ordered accordingly.

Pronounced in the open Court on 08th January, 2021.

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →