RUBAN PATLIPUTRA HOSPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. CIT, PATNA

(A.Y. 2014-2015) Ruban Patliputra Hospital Private Limited 2. The appeal is time barred by 189 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. However, the Director of the assessee-Company filed a condonation petition saying that he was not aware of the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). When the assessee came to know about the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee approached the ld. A.R. to prefer an appeal, due to that there was a delay of 189 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, he pleaded to condone the delay.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to condone the delay since the assessee has established sufficient cause to condone the delay. Hence the delay is condoned.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Private Limited Company engaged in running Nursing Homes and Emergency Services and sale of medicine. The assessee filed its return of income electronically on 29.11.2014 declaring NIL income claiming loss at Rs.34,64,44,303/-. The return of income was revised by the assessee on 18.12.2014 declaring total income at NIL claiming at Rs.34,64,44,303/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. The case was received to complete the re- assessment proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the assessee has not fulfilled the criteria of deduction under sub-section (i) and sub-section (ii) of the Section 35AD of the Act. Accordingly, after getting the approval of competent authority, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued by the ld. Assessing Officer to the assessee via registered e-mail on 31.03.2021 wherein the assessee was requested to furnish its (A.Y. 2014-2015) Ruban Patliputra Hospital Private Limited income tax return for AY 2014-215. In response to the notice u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee filed its ITR for AY 2014-15 on 26.04.2021. Accordingly notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 29.06.2021 sending the reasons for reopening the assessment and also requiring the assessee to furnish necessary details and justification for claim of deduction under section 35AD of the Act. It was noteworthy that there was no mention regarding furnishing any information or details in respect of deduction claimed under sub-section (i) and (ii) to section 35AD of the Act. Thereafter a show-cause notice dated 25.03.2022 with a copy of draft assessment order was sent to the assesese by the ld. Assessing Officer requiring it to furnish reply in respect of addition and penalties proposed in the said assessment order latest by 27.03.2022. Getting no satisfactory reply from the side of assessee, the ld. Assessing Officer assessed the taxable income at Rs.4,27,53,259/- as unexplained and initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals).