Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA
O R D E R PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M :
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 30.01.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, New Delhi, u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), relating to assessment year 2008-09. 2. The assessee has filed this appeal which is belated by approximately 520 days. In the condonation petition duly supported by affidavit, the assessee has stated as under :-
“1. That the appellant is filing the present appeal before this Hon’ble Tribunal. The contents of the appeal may be read as part and parcel of this application as the same are not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
That as per the information that there is delay in filing the appeal before this Hon’ble Tribunal is approx. 520 days.
3. That the appellant has applied the certified copy of the order and judgment dated 30.01.2015, the appellant could not get the said order from the concerned commissioner of appeal, however, with very-difficulty the appellant has received the copy of the order from the commissioner of appeal recently in the last day of June 2016.
4. That however, the appeal is within limitation from the date of knowledge i.e. 30.06.2016.
That as the order has been delivered on 30.01.2015 by the Ld. Commissioner of Appeal as such the delay in filing the appeal before this Hon’ble Tribunal is not intentional but due to the facts mentioned above.”
The assessee has also raised following further grounds, which are reproduced hereunder :-
“10A. That the appellant could not appear before the concerned assessing authority as well as appellate income tax officer due to the reason that the appellant was entangle in civil litigation with regard to the business tenanted premises of Bhagirath Place, Delhi and the litigation was going on in District Court at Tis Hazari with the Municipal Corporation of Delhi as well as DRT with bank and LIC and on the other hand the appellant has not received any notice from the income tax officer during the hearing and on the other hand the appellant was going on in personal difficulty. 10B. Because the father-in-law of the appellant was seriously ill and was going under treatment with the different hospitals, was there was no major male member in the in laws family and as such the appellant could not proceed with the case and could not appear before the Commissioner and on the other hand at last the father of the appellant had expired. 10C. That due to the non appearance of the appellant before the Appellate Commissioner, the appeal of the appellant has been dismissed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax.”
After considering the submissions of both the parties, I am of the considered opinion that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause on account of being entangled in civil litigation from filing the appeal in time.
I, therefore, condone the delay in filing the appeal.
5. In this case, the assessment order has been passed u/s 144 and before ld. CIT(A) also no representation was made on behalf of the assessee. Ld. counsel submitted that assessee could not make representation before lower revenue authorities because of family litigation. Under such circumstances, ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that matter may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for providing one more opportunity to assessee to substantiate its claim. Ld. DR vehemently opposed the assessee’s submissions and pointed out that the Assessing Officer as well as ld. CIT(A) telephonically communicated with the assessee but in spite of that the assessee did not attend the proceedings.
I have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the record of the case. I find from the assessment order that in response to various telephonic calls from the Assessing Officer, the assessee appeared and sought adjournment but no compliance was made on the adjourned dates and, therefore, the assessment order was passed u/s 144. Ld. CIT(A) has also noticed that assessee was contacted on his Mobile No.9718312312 but non-appeared. However, the assessee’s main contention is that because of civil litigation, he could not appear. Under such circumstances, in order to impart substantial justice to the assessee, I set-aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and consider it proper to restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for passing the assessment order de-novo. At the time of hearing, ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri M. L. Garg, undertook to make proper representation before the Assessing Officer.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of aforementioned observations. Order pronounced in the open court on this 07th day of March, 2017.