M/S. ARRDY ENGINEERING INNOVATIONS(P) LTD,ROURKELA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-3, VISAKHAPATANAM

PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, Judicial Member :

The captioned three appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Hyderabad in ITA Nos. 10205, 10207 & 10209/CIT(A)-9/Hyd/2018-19, dated 14/05/2019 arising out of

2 the orders passed U/s. 143(3) of the Act Income Tax Act, 1961

[the Act] for the AY 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2013-14 respectively.

huge delay of 1077 days in filing these appeals before the

Tribunal. With respect to the delay of 1077 days, the Ld. AR

drawn our attention to the petition for condonation of delay

wherein the assessee has explained the reasons that prevented

the assessee in filing these appeals before the Tribunal beyond

the prescribed time limit and submitted that for the AY 2009-10

the assessment order was passed on 23/12/2011 U/s. 143(3) of

the Act and the assessee has filed its appeal against the

assessment order before the First Appellate Authority well within

the time on 20.01.2022. Similarly, for the AYs 2010-11, 2013-14

and 2014-15 the appeals were filed within the prescribed time

limit before the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Visakhapatnam. Subsequently, all

the four appeals were transferred to the Ld. CIT(A)-9, Hyderabad.

Thereafter, the assessee received separate hearing notices for all

the four appeals intimating the date of hearing as 22/01/2019.

With respect to hearing notices, the assessee’s Representative

(Auditor) has filed letters on 22/01/2019 and sought for

adjournment of hearing of the appeals as he would be out of

3 station on the given dates of hearing. Thereafter, the assessee

did not receive any notices of hearing and the assessee was

under the bonafide belief that hearing notices would be sent to

the assessee considering the request of the assessee’s

Representative. However, the Ld. CIT(A)-9, Hyderabad vide

common order dated 14/05/2019 dismissed the appeals for the

AYs 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2013-14 and vide separate order

dated 25/02/2019 allowed the appeal for the AY 2014-15 on the

basis of the information available on record. It was further

submitted that, in the appellate order the Ld. CIT(A) mentioned

that the hearing notices could not be served on the assessee. In

fact, the assessee was not aware of the above orders of the Ld.

CIT (A) as the orders were not sent by post but were issued to the

e-mail account of the assessee. However, the assessee did not

notice the orders lying in the email at the relevant point of time

because the assessee closed its unit in Visakhapatnam on the

ground that the business was not running well and therefore

shifted its unit premises to Rourkela in Odisha State as well as

the Directors were also shifted to Rourkela. Because of the

shifting of the premises from Visakhapatnam to Rourkela, the

orders went unnoticed. Otherwise, there is no deliberate

intention to file the appeals beyond the prescribed time limit.

4 Further, due to COVID pandemic situation and considering the

restrictions prevailed at that point of time, the assessee could not

follow up the status of the appeals. It was came to know only

when Sri G S Narayan, one of the Directors, received a phone call

from the Department during the last week of December, 2021

regarding the tax arrears as the appeals filed by the assessee

before the First Appellate Authority were dismissed. Then, the

Director immediately took all possible steps required to file the

appeals before the Tribunal. But, due to shifting of the office

premises, the relevant paper could not be traced out and since

some of the relevant office staff at Visakhapatnam unit were

resigned and the assessee hardly get any help from them. Thus,

the Ld. AR submitted that the above explained all the factors

culminated into a delay of 1077 days in filing the appeals beyond

the prescribed time limit. The Ld. AR therefore submitted that

there is no willful negligence or latches on the part of the

assessee. The delay has occurred only due to lack of knowledge of

passing of the ex-parte order by the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore he

pleaded that the delay may be condoned and the matters may be

remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to

dispose of the appeals on merits.

5 3. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submitted that there is a

huge delay of 1077 days in filing the appeals before the Tribunal

and the assessee has not properly explained the delay and

therefore pleaded that the delay should not be condoned.

available on record as well as the orders of the Ld. Revenue

Authorities. It is an undisputed fact that the hearing notices have

not been served on the assessee during the First Appellate

Proceedings. Therefore, there is no dispute that the assessee is

not aware of the orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A). On perusal of

the contents of the petition filed before us seeking condonation of

delay as well as the submissions of the Ld. AR, we find that the

delay in filing the instant appeals before the Tribunal has not

been occurred due to negligence on the part of the assessee and

it is only due to lack of knowledge about the passing of the ex-

parte orders by the Ld. CIT(A). Considering the facts and

circumstances of the case which are peculiar to the present case,

we are of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to condone

the delay. At this situation, we make it clear that the decision

taken in respect of the present appeals is confined only to these

appeals of the assessee considering the peculiar facts and

6 circumstances of the case and this decision cannot be taken as a precedent with respect to condonation of delay. Thus, we hereby condone the delay of 1077 days in filing all the three appeals of the assessee and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to dispose of these appeals on merits after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the principles of natural justice. We also caution and direct the assessee to cooperate with the proceedings of the First Appellate Authority for early disposal of the appeals. It is ordered accordingly.

Pronounced in the open Court on 28th February, 2024.

Sd/- Sd/- (एस बालाकृ�णन) (दु�वू� आर.एल रे�डी) (S.BALAKRISHNAN) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यकसद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated :28/02/2024 OKK - SPS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. �नधा�रती/ The Assessee – M/s. Arrdy Engineering Innovations (P) ltd (Formerly known as M/s. Ardee Technologies (P) Ltd, BB-8 Area 7-8, Civil Township, Rourkela, Odisha – 769004.

7 2. राज�व/The Revenue – Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-3, Aayakar Bhawan, Dabagardens, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh – 530020. 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, 4.आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, �वशाखापटणम/ DR, ITAT, Visakhapatnam 6.गाड� फ़ाईल / Guard file

आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER

Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam