M/S BANGALAXMI KHADI BHAWAN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-52(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

First, we shall take up the appeal in for the A.Y 2006-07- questioning the confirmation of assessment order U/Sec 143(3) of the Act. A.Y 2006-07 ( by the assessee )

At the time of hearing before us the ld.AR submits that this appeal of assessee was filed with a delay of 538 days and referred to an affidavit dt. 25-11-14 filed by the assessee, copy of the same is on record and argued that the assessee appointed Shri Swapan Mazumder, Accountant to look after the income-tax matters and the said accountant left his job without any information and handing over necessary I.T papers and books of account. The assessee received from the said accountant necessary documents i.e. books of account, papers, assessment order and penalty order late on 23-09-2014. The assessee immediately after receiving the same filed this appeal before the Tribunal with a delay of 538 days. The ld. AR also argued that the said delay caused due to the sudden absence of said accountant, which is neither intentional nor wanton and in view of the same, prayed to condone the delay in filing the appeal and to admit the same.

On the other hand, the ld. DR has objected to the above submission of the ld.AR in condoning the delay. He further argued that the reasons stated in the affidavit dt.25-11-2014 are vague without any proof to show that the said accountant left the job and did not hand over the necessary documents to the assessee. He vehemently opposed the condonation of delay in filing the appeal and prayed to dismiss the appeal of assessee.

Heard rival submissions and perused material on record. We note that the assessment order in this case was passed on 19-12-08 u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Against which, the assessee filed an appeal before the 1st appellate authority on 06-02-09. The first appellate authority dismissed the appeal of assessee by confirming the additions made by the AO vide his order dt. 21-01-2013 and the assessee received the same on 5-2-2013, where the appeal before this Tribunal should have been filed within 60 days from the date of receipt. But, however, the assessee filed the appeal before this Tribunal on 26-09-2014, which resulted a delay of 538 days. On perusal of said affidavit filed stating reasons to condone the delay and having heard the submissions of the ld. AR & ld. DR, we are not satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit, which caused delay. Therefore, the affidavit dt. 25-11-2014 filed to condone the delay of 538 days in filing the appeal is rejected and consequently, the appeal of assessee is dismissed. 2 ITA Nos. 1849-1852/Kol/2014

In view of above, the appeal of assessee-ITA No. 1849/Kol/2014 for the A.Y 2006-07 is dismissed.

Now, we shall take up the appeal in for the A.Y 2006-07 filed challenging the confirmation of penalty imposed U/Sec.271(1)(b) of the Act.

The ld.AR submits that this appeal of assessee was filed with a delay of 195 days and referred to an affidavit dt. 07-11-17, copy of the same is on record, and argued that the assessee received the appellate order on 14-01-2014. The ld.AR further submits that one of its acting director, who is actively looking after the business of the assessee has expired on 19-01-09. Sri Swapan Majumdar, Advocate/accountant was given responsibility to look after tax matter after the death of one of its active director and a delay of 195 days caused due to lack of responsibility of the said advocate/accountant. The ld. AR also argued that the said delay caused was beyond the control of the assessee, which neither intentional nor wanton and prayed to condone the said delay in filing the appeal and to admit the same.

On the other hand, the ld. DR has adopted his same submissions as made in para-4 of this order.

Heard rival submissions and perused material on record. We note that the AO initiated the penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(b) by issuing notice dt. 04-11-08 for not complying with the notice issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act and imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/-, which was confirmed by the impugned order of the CIT-A in the first appellate proceedings. On perusal of the order of the CIT-A, it is noticed that before the CIT-A there was no appearance of the assessee and, therefore, CIT-A passed ex parte order by confirming the impugned penalty imposed u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act. On perusal of record, we 3 find that the assessee did not respond to the notice issued U/Sec. 142(1) and notice issued for initiation of penalty proceedings U/Sec. 271(1) (b) of the Act. The assessee also did not respond to the notices issued by the CIT-A in the first appellate proceedings. On perusal of the affidavit filed to condone the delay of 195 days and having heard the submissions of the ld. AR & ld. DR, we are not satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit filed to condone the delay of 195 days in filing the appeal and is rejected and consequently, the appeal of assessee is dismissed.

In view of above, the appeal of assessee in for the A.Y 2006-07 is dismissed.

The appeal-ITA No. 1851/Kol/2014 for the A.Y 2006-07 filed by the assessee challenging the confirmation of penalty of Rs.20,000/- U/Sec. 271(1)(b) of the Act.

We find that this present appeal was also filed before this Tribunal with a delay of 195 days. Both the ld.AR and ld. DR before us advanced same arguments as canvassed in for the A.Y 2006-07 regarding condonation of delay, which we have already rejected the reasons stated in the affidavit and dismissed the appeal of assessee. In view of our decision taken in ITA No. 1850/Kol/2014 A.Y 2006-07, the present appeal of assessee in ITA No.1851/Kol/2014 for the A.Y 2006-07 is dismissed.

The appeal of assessee in for the A.Y 2006-07 is dismissed.

The appeal in for the A.Y 2006-07 filed by the assessee challenging the confirmation of penalty U/Sec 271A of the Act.

The present appeal filed before this Tribunal with a delay of 195 days. Both the ld.AR and ld. DR before us advanced same arguments regarding condotnation of delay, which we have already rejected and dismissed the appeal of assessee. In view of same, the present appeal of assessee in for the A.Y 2006-07 is dismissed.

In the result, all the appeals of assessee in A.Y: 2006-07, I.T.A No. 1850/Kol/2014 A.Y: 2006-07, I.T.A No. 1851/Kol/2014 A.Y: 2006-07 and I.T.A No. 1852/Kol/2014 A.Y: 2006-07 are dismissed.