SUDHA SANTHANAM,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX,

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2131/PUN/2013Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 September 2018AY 2007-083 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding reasonable cause. However, it allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal as they had decided not to pursue it.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 30 days, citing inadvertence and examination tension on the part of the Chartered Accountant's staff. Subsequently, the assessee requested to withdraw the appeal as they decided not to pursue it after paying tax dues.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal was justifiable and whether the assessee could withdraw the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Puranik
For Respondent: Ms. Sabhana Parveen
Hearing: 19.09.2018Pronounced: 25.09.2018

आदेश / ORDER

PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of CIT(A)-II, Pune, dated 28-05-2013 for the A.Y.2007-08.

2.

There is delay of 30 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. In this connection, Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the affidavit given by Dadasaheb Balbhim Bichitkar (Chartered Accountant) dated 10-12-2013 and demonstrated the delay. The contents of the affidavit read as under :

2 ITA No.2131/PUN/2013 Sudha Santhanam

“I have completed my Article Training of CA Course of The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and at present I am working with R.D. Patil & Company Chartered Accountants, Pune. In last week of September 2013, I was assigned to file Appeal to ITAT against the Appellate Order of CIT(Appeals) confirming Penalty u/s.271(1)(c) in case of Mrs. Sudha Santhanam for Assessment Year 2007-08. However while proceeding on leave for CA Examination, preparation in the First Week of October 2013, through inadvertence and under examination tension, I failed to communicate to CA R.D. Patil Sir that Appeal papers are remained to be prepared and filed. In first week of December 2013 when the Assessing Officer called our office to confirm the payment of demand, then CA R.D. Patil Sir asked me to prepare an Application for Stay of Demand to be filed with ITAT, it is transpired that Appeal has remained to be filed by me through inadvertence and under Examination tension. This causes the delay in filing the Appeal to ITAT.”

3.

After hearing the Ld. Counsel for the assessee and perusing the

contents of the affidavit, we are of the opinion that there was a

reasonable cause for the assessee to file the appeal before the ITAT with

delay of 30 days. The lapse on the part of staff of the Chartered

Accountants office should not make the assessee helpless. Therefore, we

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.

4.

However, at the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to

the assessee’s letter dated Nil submitted that assessee wants to

withdraw the appeal filed by him. The reason for such withdrawal as

mentioned in the request application of the assessee reads as under :

“I am told that my AR has made submission and argued the appeal at length. However, same was released and is refixed. Anyway, I have decided not to pursue the Appeal, I have already paid Tax dues etc. I may please be allowed to withdraw the Appeal.”

3 ITA No.2131/PUN/2013 Sudha Santhanam

5.

Ld DR has no objection for withdrawal of the appeal by the assessee.

6.

On perusal of the assessee’s letter and having no objection from the side of Ld. DR, we allow the request of the assessee to withdraw the appeal. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee in the appeal are dismissed as ‘withdrawn’.

7.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as ‘withdrawn’.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25th September, 2018. Sd/- Sd/-

(िवकास अव�थी /VIKAS AWASTHY) (डी. क�णाकरा राव/D. KARUNAKARA RAO) �ाियक सद�/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; िदनांक / Dated : 25th September, 2018. Satish

आदेश की %ितिलिप अ'ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��थ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT (Appeals)-II, Pune 4. The CIT-II, Pune िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “ए” ब�च, 5. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 6. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →