JAI BASUKINATH TRADERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA

Jai Basukinath Traders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT Cir-8(1), Kol. Page 2 2. It emerges from a perusal of the case file that the assessee’s instant appeal suffers from 166 days’ delay in filing. It has placed on record its director’s affidavit that the assessee had been pursuing its appeal before the wrong forum involving proceedings u/s. 153C r.w.s. 153A/143(3) in pursuance to search in question dated 26.10.2015 whereas his regular assessment in issue had been framed much earlier than that on 26.03.2015 u/s 143(3) of the Act. And also that both the said proceedings involved almost similar disallowance(s) / addition(s). All these facts have gone unrebutted form the Revenue’s side. We observe that the impugned delay of 166 days in filing the instant main appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate but on account of circumstances beyond the taxpayer’s control. Hon'ble Hon'ble apex court’s landmark judgment COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION VS. Mst. KATIJI (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) holds that technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice. We accordingly condone the impugned delay of 166 days in filing of assessee’s appeal on merits.

Coming to merits his main case, it emerges from a perusal of the CIT(A)’s order that he has treated the assessee’s lower appeal as dismissed in view of the fact that its yet another appeal arising from sec. 153C proceedings was pending before the CIT(A)-3 Patna against the corresponding centralized assessment. We see no reason to confirm the CIT(A)’s order under challenge since the impugned proceedings relate to regular assessment finalized on 26.03.2015 i.e. much earlier than the search action dated 26.03.2015 in question. That being the case, we restore the assessee’s grievance on legal aspects as well as on merits back to the CIT(A) for appropriate adjudication as per law within three effective opportunities of hearing.