M/S.PHA INDIA P LTD.,KANCHIPURAM vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(2), CHENNAI

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जी.मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी अ"नकेश बनज%, "या"यक सद"य के सम& BEFORE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.821/Chny/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s. PHA India P.Ltd Vs The Assistant Commissioner of C-16, & C-25, SIPCOT Industrial Park, Income Tax, Irungattukottai,Sriperumbudrur Corporate Circle-5(2) Kanchipuram Dist. PIN:602 117. Chennai-34. PAN: AAACP 6585A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

: Mr. A.Arjunraj, C.A for अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant by Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate : Mr. G.Johnson, Addl.CIT ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent by 09.03.2022 सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date of hearing : 16.03.2022 : घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R PER G.MANJUNATHA, AM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against

order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3,

Chennai, dated 06.03.2020 and pertains to assessment year

2011-12. 2. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 145 days in appeal filed by the assessee . During the course of hearing,

learned AR for the assessee, submitted that delay in filing of appeal is mainly due to lockdown imposed by the Govt. on account of spread of Covid-19 infections and in view of Hon’ble

Supreme Court suo motu Writ Petition No.3 of 2020, if the period of delay is covered within the period specified in the 2 order of the Apex Court , then same needs to be condoned in view of specific problem faced by the public on account of Covid-19 pandemic.

motu Writ Petition No.3 of 2020, has extended limitation

applicable to all proceedings in respect of courts and tribunals

across the country on account of spread of Covid-19 infections

w.e.f. 15.03.2020, till further orders and said general exemption

has been extended from time to time. We further noted that delay noticed by the Registry pertains to the period of general

exemption provided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court extending

limitation period applicable for all proceedings before Courts

and Tribunals and thus, considering facts and circumstances of the case and also in the interest of natural justice, we condone

delay in filing appeal filed by the assessee.

3 5. We have heard both the parties, perused material

available on record and gone through orders of the authorities

below. Admittedly, assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer was ex-parte, the assessee neither

appeared nor furnished any details to justify its claim of disallowance u/s.14A amounting to Rs.25,22,865/-,

disallowance towards leave encashment salary amounting to Rs.9,65,261/- and disallowance of Rs.16,07,892/- by invoking

provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal filed before the first appellate authority,

was delayed by 7 days. According to learned CIT(A), no affidavit or sufficient cause has been assigned by the assessee

for condoning delay in filing of appeal. Therefore, left with no option, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without

condoning the delay of 7 days in filing appeal. Before us, the assessee explained reasons for not appearing before the learned CIT(A). Therefore, considering reasons given by the assessee and also delay of 7 days, we deem it appropriate to set aside appeal filed by the assessee to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct the CIT(A) to condone delay of 7 days in filing

appeal and also decide issue on merits.

4 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 16th March, 2022 (जी. मंजुनाथ) (अ"नकेश बनज%) (Anikesh Banerjee) (G.Manjunatha) "या"यक सद%य /Judicial Member लेखा सद%य / Accountant Member चे"नई/Chennai, (दनांक/Dated 16th March, 2022 DS

आदेश क" ""त*ल+प अ,े+षत/Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. आयकर आयु-त (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु-त/CIT 5. +वभागीय ""त"न1ध/DR 6. गाड" फाईल/GF.