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, V.P. :
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 27.09.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Gurgaon, u/s 147/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), relating to assessment year 2009-10.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed return of income declaring total income of Rs.3,85,654/- on 30.09.2009. The assessment was completed at a total income of Rs.15,03,070/-. Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal as the appeal filed by the assessee was late by two weeks. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and has taken following grounds of appeal :-
“1. The CIT(A) has passed the order which is bad in law and against the facts of the case.
2. The CIT [A] has erred to dismiss the appeal in limini by observing delay of 14 days with out considering substantial justice vis - a- vis technical consideration by disregarding the reasonable cause as stated in the condonation application. thereby also disregarded the HON.Supreme court in the case of collector, land acquisition v master Katiji.
3. The CIT(A) has not exercised there powers uls 249(3) judiciously, therefore, the order be annulled to be reheard. The above grounds are with out prejudice to each other. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify or delete any of the grounds at the time of hearing.”
Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to page 1 of Paper Book, wherein, copy of acknowledgement of filing the return is contained, wherein, following address has been given – “Shri Pawan Kumar, 473/20, Shakti Nagar, Pataudi Chowk, Gurgaon, Haryana”. Ld. counsel referred to the assessment order, wherein, the address of the assessee has been given as follows - “Shri Pawan Kumar, CW-66, Malibu Town, Sohna Road, Gurgaon”. Ld. counsel referred to the synopsis filed by assessee, wherein, it is pointed out that the assessee came to know about the assessment order when incidentally he had gone to meet counsel for other work but by that time the filing of appeal before ld. CIT(A) was late by 14 days.
I have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the record of the case. Admittedly, there is difference in the address mentioned in the return of income and the address given in the assessment order as well as in ld. CIT(A)’s order. Under such circumstances, in order to impart of substantial justice to assessee, I condone the delay in filing appeal before ld. CIT(A) and set-aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the assessee’s appeal de- novo, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 12th day of April, 2017.