Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B”, BENCH KOLKATA
Before: SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM
आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, AM:
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2014-15, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-2, Kolkata, in appeal no. 10210/CIT(A)-2/17-18, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) dated 25/12/2016.
2 Blue Water Pictures & Productions Assessment Year:2014-15 2.We have heard ld DR for the Revenue and perused the material available on record. At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of assessee in spite of issuance of notice for hearing. We have gone through the order of ld CIT(A) and noticed that ld. CIT(A) hadrejected the petition of assessee for condonation of delay in filing appeal stating that the assessee could not explain the reasons for condonation of delay and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
We note that date of service of assessment order as per form 35 filed by the assessee is 01.09.2017 and date of filing the appeal before ld. CIT(A) is 07.10.2017. As per clause (b) of sub section 2 of section 249 of the Act, the appeal shall be presented within 30 days from the date of service of the notice of demand relating to the assessment. In this case the appeal should have been filed on or before 01.10.2017.Therefore, there is six days delay in filing the appeal.We note that ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee stating that ignorance of law is not an excuse for not taking appropriate steps within limitation and for that he relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Swadeshi Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs. Govt. of UP reported in [1975] 4 SCC 378 (SC) .
We note that during the appellate stage the assessee had explained the reasons for delay as follows:
“Due to Durga Puja and Lakshmi Puja in Kolkata, the offices were closed for seven days.” We note that assessee could not file the appeal before the ld CIT(A) within the time limit prescribed by the Act due to Durga Puja festival and Lakshmi Puja festival, as the offices in Kolkatawere closed for 7 days. We note that in Kolkata City (W.B) the Durga Puja is very famous, and it is celebrated continuously for 10 days. The construction of Pandals for Durga Puja normally started one Month back of the festival and therefore generally offices remain closed for peak period of festivals. The staff working in the offices of advocates also take leave to 3 Blue Water Pictures & Productions Assessment Year:2014-15 celebrate the festival. Therefore, we note that assessee has explained the delay satisfactorily.
When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. When we weigh these two aspects then the side of justice becomes heavier and casts a duty on the judiciary to deliver justice. We, therefore, condone the delay of 6 days and direct the ld CIT(A) to adjudicate the assessee`s appeal on merit.Therefore, we think it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 29.01.2020