SRI RANGAPPA KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(2)(2), BANGALORE

O R D E R PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Present appeal has been filed by assessee against order dated 01/03/19 passed by Ld. CIT(A), Bangalore for assessment year 2014 – 15.

15 2. At the outset, Ld. AR submitted that, there was delay of 182 days in filing appeal before Ld. CIT(A). He submitted that on advice received from his CA/Tax Consultant, he did not file appeal within the period of limitation. It has been submitted that, only when penalty proceedings were initiated and assessee received order under section 271(1)(c), he approached some other CA/Tax Consultant, who advised him to file appeal against assessment order passed under section 143 (3). 2.1. Ld. AR submitted that, appeal was filed on 27/07/17 immediately within a period of one month on receipt of penalty order dated 27/06/17. He submitted that assessee was made to believe that in the event addition under assessment order passed was accepted, penalty would not be levied. Ld. AR, thus submitted that, it was under this bona fide belief, assessee did not file appeal before Ld. CIT (A) within the period of limitation against assessment order under section 143 (3) of the Act.

15 giving proper opportunity to assessee of being represented as per law. In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order passed in the open court on 14th January, 2020.